Network Working Group                                       J. Galbraith
Request for Comments: 4335                              VanDyke Software
Category: Standards Track                                     P. Remaker
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc
                                                           January 2006


        The Secure Shell (SSH) Session Channel Break Extension

Status of This Memo

  This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
  Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
  improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
  Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
  and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

Abstract

  The Session Channel Break Extension provides a means to send a BREAK
  signal over a Secure Shell (SSH) terminal session.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction ....................................................2
  2. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................2
  3. The Break Request ...............................................3
  4. Security Considerations .........................................4
  5. IANA Considerations .............................................4
  6. References ......................................................4
     6.1. Normative References .......................................4
     6.2. Informative References .....................................5















Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4335                  SSH Break Extension               January 2006


1.  Introduction

  The Secure Shell (SSH) [5] session channel provides a mechanism for
  the client-user to interactively enter commands and receive output
  from a remote host while taking advantage of the SSH transport's
  privacy and integrity features.  SSH is increasingly being used to
  replace Telnet for terminal access applications.

  A common application of the Telnet protocol is the "Console Server"
  [7] whereby a Telnet Network Virtual Terminal (NVT) can be connected
  to a physical RS-232/V.24 asynchronous port, making the Telnet NVT
  appear as a locally attached terminal to that port, and making that
  physical port appear as a network-addressable device.  A number of
  major computer equipment vendors provide high-level administrative
  functions through an asynchronous serial port and generally expect
  the attached terminal to be capable of sending a BREAK signal.

  A BREAK signal is defined as the TxD signal being held in a SPACE
  ("0") state for a time greater than a whole character time.  In
  practice, a BREAK signal is typically 250 to 500 ms in length.

  The Telnet protocol furnishes a means to send a "BREAK" signal, which
  RFC 854 [1] defines as "a signal outside the USASCII set which is
  currently given local meaning within many systems".  Console Server
  vendors interpret the TELNET BREAK signal as a physical BREAK signal,
  which can then allow access to the full range of administrative
  functions available on an asynchronous serial console port.

  The lack of a similar facility in the SSH session channel has forced
  users to continue the use of Telnet for the "Console Server"
  function.

2.  Conventions Used in This Document

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in [2].

  The "byte", "boolean", "uint32", and "string" data types are defined
  in [3].











Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4335                  SSH Break Extension               January 2006


3.  The Break Request

  The following channel-specific request can be sent over a session
  channel (as described in [4]) to request that the remote host perform
  a BREAK operation.

       byte      SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_REQUEST
       uint32    recipient channel
       string    "break"
       boolean   want_reply
       uint32    break-length in milliseconds

  If the BREAK length cannot be controlled by the application receiving
  this request, the BREAK length parameter SHOULD be ignored and the
  default BREAK signal length of the chipset or underlying chipset
  driver SHOULD be sent.

  If the application receiving this request can control the BREAK
  length, the following suggestions are made regarding BREAK duration.
  If a BREAK duration request of greater than 3000 ms is received, it
  SHOULD be interpreted as a request for a 3000 ms BREAK.  This
  safeguard prevents an unreasonably long BREAK request from causing a
  port to become unavailable for as long as 49.7 days while executing
  the BREAK.  Applications that require a longer BREAK may choose to
  ignore this suggestion.  If BREAK duration request of less than 500
  ms is received, it SHOULD be interpreted as a 500 ms BREAK since most
  devices will recognize a BREAK of that length.  Applications that
  require a shorter BREAK may choose to ignore this suggestion.  If the
  BREAK length parameter is 0, the BREAK SHOULD be interpreted as the
  default BREAK signal length of the chipset or underlying chipset
  driver.  If no default exists, 500 ms can be used as the BREAK
  length.

  If the SSH connection does not terminate on a physical serial port,
  the BREAK indication SHOULD be handled in a manner consistent with
  the general use of BREAK as an attention/interrupt signal; for
  instance, a service processor that requires an out-of-band facility
  to get the attention of a system it manages.

  In a case where an SSH connection cascades to another connection, the
  BREAK SHOULD be passed along the cascaded connection.  For example, a
  Telnet session from an SSH shell should carry along an SSH-initiated
  BREAK, and an SSH client initiated from a Telnet connection SHOULD
  pass a BREAK indication from the Telnet connection.







Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4335                  SSH Break Extension               January 2006


  If the 'want_reply' boolean is set, the server MUST reply using an
  SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS or SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_FAILURE [5] message.  If a
  BREAK of any kind was preformed, SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS MUST be
  sent.  If no BREAK was preformed, SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_FAILURE MUST be
  sent.

  This operation SHOULD be supported by any general purpose SSH client.

4.  Security Considerations

  Many computer systems treat serial consoles as local and secured, and
  interpret a BREAK signal as an instruction to halt execution of the
  operating system or to enter privileged configuration modes.  Because
  of this, extra care should be taken to ensure that SSH access to
  BREAK-enabled ports are limited to users with appropriate privileges
  to execute such functions.  Alternatively, support for the BREAK
  facility MAY be implemented as configurable on a per-port or
  per-server basis.

  Implementations that literally interpret the BREAK length parameter
  without imposing the suggested BREAK time limit may cause a denial of
  service to or unexpected results from attached devices receiving the
  very long BREAK signal.

5.  IANA Considerations

  IANA has assigned the Connection Protocol Channel Request Name
  "break" in accordance with [6].

6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

  [1]  Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Telnet Protocol Specification",
       STD 8, RFC 854, May 1983.

  [2]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
       Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [3]  Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH) Protocol
       Architecture", RFC 4251, January 2006.

  [4]  Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH)
       Transport Layer Protocol", RFC 4253, January 2006.

  [5]  Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH)
       Connection Protocol", RFC 4254, January 2006.




Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4335                  SSH Break Extension               January 2006


  [6]  Lehtinen, S. and C. Lonvick, Ed., "The Secure Shell (SSH)
       Protocol Assigned Numbers", RFC 4250, January 2006.

6.2.  Informative References

  [7]  Harris, D., "Greater Scroll of Console Knowledge", March 2004,
       <http://www.conserver.com/consoles/>.

Authors' Addresses

  Joseph Galbraith
  VanDyke Software
  4848 Tramway Ridge Blvd
  Suite 101
  Albuquerque, NM  87111
  US

  Phone: +1 505 332 5700
  EMail: [email protected]


  Phillip Remaker
  Cisco Systems, Inc
  170 West Tasman Drive
  San Jose, CA  95120
  US

  Phone: +1 408 526 8614
  EMail: [email protected]






















Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4335                  SSH Break Extension               January 2006


Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

  This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
  contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
  retain all their rights.

  This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
  OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
  ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
  INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
  INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
  WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

  The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
  Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
  pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
  this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
  might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
  made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
  on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
  found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

  Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
  assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
  attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
  such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
  specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
  http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

  The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
  copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
  rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
  this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
  [email protected].

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
  Administrative Support Activity (IASA).







Galbraith & Remaker         Standards Track                     [Page 6]