[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-salgueiro-sipclf-indexed-ascii) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 RFC 6873

SIPCLF                                                      G. Salgueiro
Internet-Draft                                             Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track                              V. Gurbani
Expires: June 9, 2012                          Bell Labs, Alcatel-Lucent
                                                             A. B. Roach
                                                                 Tekelec
                                                        December 7, 2011


Format for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF)
                      draft-ietf-sipclf-format-04

Abstract

   The SIPCLF Workgroup has defined a common log format framework for
   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) servers.  This common log format
   mimics the wildly successful event logging mechanism found in well-
   known web servers like Apache and web proxies like Squid.  This
   document proposes an indexed text encoding format for the SIP Common
   Log Format (CLF) that retains the key advantages of a text-based
   format, while significantly increasing processing performance over a
   purely text-based implementation.  This file format adheres to the
   SIP CLF data model and provides an effective encoding scheme for all
   mandatory and optional fields that appear in a SIP CLF record.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on June 9, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Document Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     4.1.  Index Pointers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.2.  Mandatory Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     4.3.  Optional Fields  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5.  Example SIP CLF Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   6.  Text Tool Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   7.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   8.  Operational Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   9.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26






















Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


1.  Introduction

   The extensive list of benefits and the widespread adoption of the
   Apache Common Log Format (CLF) has prompted the development of a
   functionally equivalent event logging mechanism for the Session
   Initiation Protocol [RFC3261] (SIP).  Implementing a logging scheme
   for SIP is a considerable challenge.  This is due in part to the fact
   that the behavior of a SIP entity is more complex as compared to an
   HTTP entity.  Additionally, there are shortcomings to the purely
   text-based HTTP Common Log Format that need to be addressed in order
   to allow for real-time inspection of SIP log files.  Experience with
   Apache Common Log Format has shown that dealing with large quantities
   of log data can be very processor intensive, as doing so necessarily
   requires reading and parsing every byte in the log file(s) of
   interest.

   An implementation independent framework for the SIP CLF has been
   defined in [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].  This memo describes
   an indexed text file format for logging SIP messages received and
   sent by SIP clients, servers, and proxies that adheres to the data
   model presented in Section 8 of [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].
   This document defines a format that is no more difficult to generate
   by logging entities, while being radically faster to process.  In
   particular, the format is optimized for both rapidly scanning through
   log records, as well as quickly locating commonly accessed data
   fields.

   Further, the format proposed by this document retains the key
   advantage of being human readable and able to be processed using the
   various Unix text processing tools, such as sed, awk, perl, cut, and
   grep.


2.  Terminology

   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 [RFC2119].

   [RFC3261] defines additional terms used in this document that are
   specific to the SIP domain such as "proxy"; "registrar"; "redirect
   server"; "user agent server" or "UAS"; "user agent client" or "UAC";
   "back-to-back user agent" or "B2BUA"; "dialog"; "transaction";
   "server transaction".







Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   This document uses the term "SIP Server" that is defined to include
   the following SIP entities: user agent server, registrar, redirect
   server, a SIP proxy in the role of user agent server, and a B2BUA in
   the role of a user agent server.

   The reader is expected to be familiar with the terminology and
   concepts defined in [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].


3.  Document Conventions

   This document defines the logging syntax for the SIP CLF.  This
   syntax is demonstrated through the use of various examples.  The
   formatting described here does not permit these examples to be
   unambiguously rendered due to the constraints imposed by the
   formatting rules for Internet-Drafts.  To avoid ambiguity and to meet
   the Internet-Draft layout requirements this document uses the
   <allOneLine/> markup convention established in [RFC4475].

   For the sake of clarity and completeness, the entire text defining
   this markup convention from Section 2.1 of [RFC4475] is quoted below:

      Several of these examples contain unfolded lines longer than 72
      characters.  These are captured between <allOneLine/> tags.  The
      single unfolded line is reconstructed by directly concatenating
      all lines appearing between the tags (discarding any line feeds or
      carriage returns).  There will be no whitespace at the end of
      lines.  Any whitespace appearing at a fold-point will appear at
      the beginning of a line.

      The following represent the same string of bits:

         Header-name: first value, reallylongsecondvalue, third value

         <allOneLine>
         Header-name: first value,
          reallylongsecondvalue
         , third value
         </allOneLine>












Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


         <allOneLine>
         Header-name: first value,
          reallylong
         second
         value,
          third value
         </allOneLine>

      Note that this is NOT SIP header-line folding, where different
      strings of bits have equivalent meaning.

   The ip addresses used in the examples in this document adhere to the
   best practices outlined in [RFC5735] and correspond to the
   documentation address block 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1) as described in
   [RFC5737].


4.  Format

   The Common Log Format for the Session Initiation Protocol
   [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement] defines a data model to which
   this logging format format adheres.  Each SIP CLF record MUST consist
   of all the mandatory data model elements outlined in Section 8.1 of
   [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].

   All SIP CLF records MUST have the following format:


     0          7 8        15 16       23 24         31
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |  Version  |           Record Length           | 0 - 3
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |       Record Length (cont)        |    0x2C   | 4 - 7
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |              CSeq Pointer (Hex)               | 8 - 11
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |      Response Status-Code Pointer (Hex)       | 12 - 15
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |              R-URI Pointer (Hex)              | 16 - 19
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |   Destination IP address:port Pointer (Hex)   | 20 - 23
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |     Source IP address:port Pointer (Hex)      | 24 - 27
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |             To URI Pointer (Hex)              | 28 - 31
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |             To Tag Pointer (Hex)              | 32 - 35
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


     |            From URI Pointer (Hex)             | 36 - 39
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |            From Tag Pointer (Hex)             | 40 - 43
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |             Call-Id Pointer (Hex)             | 44 - 47
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |           Server-Txn Pointer (Hex)            | 48 - 51
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |           Client-Txn Pointer (Hex)            | 52 - 55
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |      Optional Fields Start Pointer (Hex)      | 56 - 59
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |    0x0A   |                                   | 60 - 63
     +-----------+                                   +
     |                   Timestamp                   | 64 - 67
     +                                   +-----------+
     |                                   |    0x2E   | 68 - 71
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |         Fractional Seconds        |    0x09   | 72 - 75
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |                  Flags Field                  | 76 - 79
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |Flag (cont)|    0x09   |                       | 80 - 83
     |-----------+-----------+                       |
     |                                               |
     |                                               |
     |      Mandatory Fields (variable length)       |
     |                                               |
     |                                               |
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |    0x09   |          Tag          |    0x40   |\
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ \
     |                   Vendor-ID                   |  \
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+   \
     |                Vendor-ID (cont)               |    \   Repeated
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+     \  as many
     |     0x2C  |            Length (Hex)           |      > times as
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+     /  necessary
     | Len (cont)|    0x2C   |                       |    /
     +-----------+-----------+                       |   /
     |                                               |  /
     |            Value (variable length)            | /
     |                                               |/
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |    0x0A   |
     +-----------+

                      Figure 1: SIP Common Log Format



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   The format presented in Figure 1 is for a single SIP CLF log entry.
   While there is no actual subdivision in practice, this format can be
   logically subdivided into the following three distinct components:

      1.  Index Pointers - The first 60-bytes of this format.  This
      portion is metadata, primarily composed of a list of pointers that
      indicate the beginning of both the variable length mandatory and
      optional fields that are logged as part of this record.  These
      pointers are implemented as a mechanism to improve processing of
      these records and to allow a reader to expeditiously skip right to
      the desired field without unnecessarily going through the entire
      record.  This logical subdivision within the SIP CLF format will
      be referenced in this document with the <IndexPointers> tag.

      2.  Mandatory Fields - The next logical grouping in this format is
      a tab delimited listing of the mandatory fields as described in
      Section 8.1 of [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement] and in the
      order listed in <IndexPointers>.  This logical subdivision within
      the SIP CLF format will be referenced in this document with the
      <MandatoryFields> tag.

      3.  Optional Fields - The last logical component MAY be present as
      it is an OPTIONAL extension to the SIP CLF format.  Its purpose is
      to provide flexibility to the developer of this SIP CLF to log any
      desired fields not included in <MandatoryFields>.  This includes
      SIP bodies and any vendor-specific extensions.  This logical
      subdivision within the SIP CLF format will be referenced in this
      document with the <OptionalFields> tag.

   This logical structure of the SIP CLF record format can be
   graphically represented as shown in Figure 2 below:


                                 <IndexPointers>
                                 <MandatoryFields>
                                 <OptionalFields>


             Figure 2: Logical Structure of the SIP CLF Record

   Note that Figure 1 and Figure 2 plus the terminating line-feed at the
   end of the SIP CLF record are different representations of the same
   format but are functionally equivalent.  The representation of this
   format is a two line record where the <IndexPointers> metadata is on
   one line and the actual data like <MandatoryFields> and
   <OptionalFields> (if present) is on another.





Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 7]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   In the following sections note that indications of "hexadecimal
   encoded" indicate that the value is to be written out in human-
   readable base-16 numbers using the ASCII characters 0x30 through 0x39
   ('0' through '9') and 0x41 through 0x46 ('A' through 'F').
   Similarly, indications of "decimal encoded" indicate that the value
   is to be written out in human readable base-10 number using the ASCII
   characters 0x30 through 0x39 ('0' through '9').  In both encodings,
   numbers always take up the number of bytes indicated, and are padded
   on the left with ASCII '0' (zero) characters to fill the entire
   space.









































Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 8]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


4.1.  Index Pointers

   The <IndexPointers> portion of the SIP CLF record (shown in Figure 3)
   is a 60-byte header that indicates metadata about the record.


            0          7 8        15 16       23 24         31
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |  Version  |           Record Length           | 0 - 3
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |       Record Length (cont)        |    0x2C   | 4 - 7
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |              CSeq Pointer (Hex)               | 8 - 11
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |      Response Status-Code Pointer (Hex)       | 12 - 15
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |              R-URI Pointer (Hex)              | 16 - 19
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |   Destination IP address:port Pointer (Hex)   | 20 - 23
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |     Source IP address:port Pointer (Hex)      | 24 - 27
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |             To URI Pointer (Hex)              | 28 - 31
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |             To Tag Pointer (Hex)              | 32 - 35
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |            From URI Pointer (Hex)             | 36 - 39
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |            From Tag Pointer (Hex)             | 40 - 43
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |             Call-Id Pointer (Hex)             | 44 - 47
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |           Server-Txn Pointer (Hex)            | 48 - 51
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |           Client-Txn Pointer (Hex)            | 52 - 55
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |      Optional Fields Start Pointer (Hex)      | 56 - 59
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+


                         Figure 3: Index Pointers










Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                  [Page 9]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   The fields that make up <IndexPointers> are described below:

   Version (1 byte):  0x41 for this document; hexadecimal encoded.

   Record Length (6 bytes):  Hexadecimal encoded total length of this
      log record, including "Version", "Record Length", "Flags" fields
      and terminating line-feed.

   Bytes 8 through 55 contain hexadecimal encoded pointers that point to
   the starting location of each of the variable-length mandatory
   fields.  Note that there are no delimiters between these pointer
   values -- they are packed together as a single, 52-character
   hexadecimal encoded string.  The "Pointer" fields indicate absolute
   byte values within the record, and MUST be >=82.  They point to the
   start of the corresponding value within the <MandatoryFields>
   portion.  A description of each of the mandatory fields that these
   pointer values point to can be found in Section 4.2.

   Optional Fields Start Pointer:  This final pointer indicates the
      location within the SIP CLF record where the OPTIONAL group of
      <OptionalFields> begin, if present.  The "Optional Fields Start
      Pointer" points to the ASCII Tab (0x09) character for the first
      entry in the <OptionalFields> portion.  If the OPTIONAL group of
      <OptionalFields> are not implemented, then the "Optional Fields
      Start Pointer" field MUST point to the terminating line-feed
      (0x0A) at the end of the SIP CLF record.

























Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 10]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


4.2.  Mandatory Fields

   The <MandatoryFields> portion of the SIP CLF record is shown below:


            0          7 8        15 16       23 24         31
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |    0x0A   |                                   | 60 - 63
            +-----------+                                   +
            |                   Timestamp                   | 64 - 67
            +                                   +-----------+
            |                                   |    0x2E   | 68 - 71
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |         Fractional Seconds        |    0x09   | 72 - 75
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |                  Flags Field                  | 76 - 79
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
            |Flag (cont)|    0x09   |                       | 80 - 83
            |-----------+-----------+                       |
            |                                               |
            |                                               |
            |      Mandatory Fields (variable length)       |
            |                                               |
            |                                               |
            +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+


                        Figure 4: Mandatory Fields

   Following the pointers in <IndexPointers>, two fixed-length fields
   are encoded to specify the exact time of the log entry.  As before,
   all fields are completely filled, pre-pending values with '0'
   characters as necessary.

   Timestamp (10 bytes):  Date and time of the request or response
      represented as the number of seconds since the Unix epoch (i.e.
      seconds since midnight, January 1st, 1970, GMT).  Represented in
      big-endian fashion with most significant octet first from zero
      starting at the left, or high-order, position.  Decimal encoded.

   Fractional Seconds (3 bytes):  Fractional seconds portion of the
      Timestamp field to millisecond accuracy.  Represented in big-
      endian fashion with most significant octet first from zero
      starting at the left, or high-order, position.  Decimal encoded.







Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 11]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   Flags Field (5 bytes):

      byte 1 -   Request/Response flag

         R = Request
         r = Response

      byte 2 -   Retransmission flag

         O = Original transmission
         D = Duplicate transmission
         S = Server is stateless [i.e., retransmissions are not
         detected]

      byte 3 -   Sent/Received flag

         S = Sent mesage
         R = Received mesage

      byte 4 -   Transport flag

         U = UDP
         T = TCP
         S = SCTP

      byte 5 -   Encryption flag

         E = Encrytpted mesage (TLS, DTLS, etc.)
         U = Unencrypted mesage

   After the "Timestamp", "Fractional Seconds" and the "Flags" fields
   are the actual values for the mandatory fields specified in Section
   8.1 of [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement], which are described
   below:

   CSeq:  The Command Sequence header field, including the CSeq number
      and method name.

   Response Status-Code:  Set to the value of the SIP response status
      code for responses.  Set to a single ASCII dash (0x2D) for
      requests.

   R-URI:  The Request-URI in the start line (mandatory in request),
      including any URI parameters.







Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 12]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   Destination IP address:port  The IP address of the downstream server,
      including the port number.  For IPv4 addresses the port number
      MUST be separated from the IP address by a single ':'.  IPv6
      addresses are represented using the bracket notation detailed in
      Section 6 of [RFC5952].  That is, the IPv6 address enclosed in
      square brackets and separated from the port number by a single
      ':').

   Source IP address:port  The IP address of the upstream client,
      including the port number over which the SIP message was received.
      For IPv4 addresses the port number MUST be separated from the IP
      address by a single ':'.  IPv6 addresses are represented using the
      bracket notation detailed in Section 6 of [RFC5952].  That is, the
      IPv6 address enclosed in square brackets and separated from the
      port number by a single ':').

   To URI:  Value of the URI in the To header field.

   To Tag:  Value of the tag parameter (if present) in the To header
      field.

   From URI:  Value of the URI in the From header field.

   From Tag:  Value of the tag parameter in the From header field.

   Whilst one may question the value of the From URI in light of
   [RFC4474], the From URI, nonetheless, imparts some information.  For
   one, the From tag is important and, in the case of a REGISTER
   request, the From URI can provide information on whether this was a
   third-party registration or a first-party one.

   Call-Id:  The value of the Call-ID header field.

   Server-Txn:  Server transaction identification code - the transaction
      identifier associated with the server transaction.
      Implementations can reuse the server transaction identifier (the
      topmost branch-id of the incoming request, with or without the
      magic cookie), or they could generate a unique identification
      string for a server transaction (this identifier needs to be
      locally unique to the server only.)  This identifier is used to
      correlate ACKs and CANCELs to an INVITE transaction; it is also
      used to aid in forking.  (See Section 9.4 of
      [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement] for usage.)








Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 13]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   Client-Txn:  Client transaction identification code - this field is
      used to associate client transactions with a server transaction
      for forking proxies or B2BUAs.  Upon forking, implementations can
      reuse the value they inserted into the topmost Via header's branch
      parameter, or they can generate a unique identification string for
      the client transaction.  (See Section 9.4 of
      [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement] for usage.)

   This data MUST appear in the order listed in <IndexPointers>, and
   each field MUST be present.  Fields are subject the maximum SIP CLF
   field size of 4096 bytes as detailed in Section 8 of
   [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement] and are separated by a single
   ASCII Tab character (0x09).  Any Tab characters present in the data
   to be written will be replaced by an ASCII space character (0x20)
   prior to being logged.

   Table 1 of Section 8.2 of [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement]
   summarizes how the mandatory fields are logged by the various SIP
   entities.  This illustrates the fact that there are instances when a
   given mandatory field is not applicable for logging in the SIP CLF
   because it does not make sense based on the role the entity is
   playing in the SIP ecosystem.  In such circumstances, if a given
   mandatory field is not present then that empty field MUST be encoded
   as a single horizontal dash ("-").

   In the event that a field failed to parse it MUST be encoded as a
   single question mark ("?").  If these characters are part of a
   sequence of other characters, then there is no ambiguity.  If the
   field being logged contains only one character, and that character is
   the literal "-", the implementation SHOULD insert an escaped %2D for
   that field in the SIP CLF record.  Similarly, if the field contains
   only one character, and that character is the literal "?", the
   implementation SHOULD insert an escaped %3F for that field in the SIP
   CLF record.

















Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 14]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


4.3.  Optional Fields

   The <OptionalFields> portion of the SIP CLF record is shown below:

     0          7 8        15 16       23 24         31
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
     |    0x09   |          Tag          |    0x40   |\
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ \
     |                   Vendor-ID                   |  \
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+   \
     |                Vendor-ID (cont)               |    \   Repeated
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+     \  as many
     |     0x2C  |            Length (Hex)           |      > times as
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+     /  necessary
     | Len (cont)|    0x2C   |                       |    /
     +-----------+-----------+                       |   /
     |                                               |  /
     |            Value (variable length)            | /
     |                                               |/
     +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

                         Figure 5: Optional Fields

   Optional fields are those SIP message elements that are not a part of
   the mandatory fields list detailed in Section 8.1 of
   [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].  After the <MandatoryFields>
   section, there is an OPTIONAL <OptionalFields> group (shown in
   Figure 5) that MAY appear zero or more times.  This <OptionalFields>
   group provides extensibility to the SIP CLF.  It allows SIP CLF
   implementers the flexibility to extend the logging capability of the
   indexed-ASCII representation beyond just the mandatory log elements
   described in Section 8.1 of [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].

   Logging any optional SIP elements MUST be done according to the
   format shown in Figure 5.  The location of the start of
   <OptionalFields> within the SIP CLF record is indicated by the
   "Optional Fields Start Pointer" field in <IndexPointers>.  After the
   initial Tab delimiter byte (0x09) shown in Figure 5, the optional
   field being logged is generally represented by the notation:

                         Tag@Vendor-ID,Length,Value










Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 15]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   The optional field identifier (Tag@Vendor-ID) is composed of a two
   byte Tag and an eight byte Vendor-ID (both decimal encoded) separated
   by an "@" character (0x40).  This uniquely identifies the optional
   field being logged.  The format for this identifier is loosely
   modeled after the private use option used by the Syslog protocol
   [RFC5424] (Note: this is the second format detailed in Section 6.3.2
   of [RFC5424]).  It makes use of the Private Enterprise Number (PEN),
   which provides an identifier through a globally unique name space
   [PEN].  This syntax provides the necessary extensibility to SIP CLF
   to allow logging of any SIP header, body, as well as any vendor-
   specified SIP element.

   Optional fields are logged according to the following two syntax
   rules:

   (1)  Vendor-ID = 00000000

      A Vendor-ID of zero is used to log the entire SIP message, message
      body, Reason-Phrase or any SIP header fields that are not a part
      of the mandatory fields list detailed in Section 8.1 of
      [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].  The following Tag values are
      used to identify which of these optional elements are being
      logged:



      Tag = 00 - Log SIP Header Field or Reason-Phrase

         When logging a SIP Header Field (Tag=00), the associated
         "Value" field MUST be populated by the entire header field
         being logged.  That is, the field-name, the associated colon
         (":") and the field-value.  This mechanism provides the
         capability to optionally log any SIP header field by
         identifying the field being logged within the "Value" field.

         Because the Reason-Phrase in a response is part of the Status-
         Line and is not identified with a field-name, it is a special
         case.  In this instance, the the associated "Value" field MUST
         be populated by the name "Reason-Phrase" followed by a colon
         (":") and a single space (SP) between the colon and the logged
         Reason-Phrase value.

         The corresponding "Length" field includes the length of the
         entire "Value" field.  This includes the field-name, the colon,
         and any LWS separator.






Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 16]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


         If an optional field occurs more than once in a SIP message
         (e.g.  Contact, Route, Record-Route, etc.) then each occurrence
         MUST be logged separately with same Tag value.

      Tag = 01 - Log message body

         SIP message bodies with the following body types can be
         optionally logged:

         (a)  Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] (Content-
              Type: application/sdp)
         (b)  Extensible Markup Language (XML) [W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
              payloads (Content-Type: application/*+xml)
         (c)  binary (Content-Type: application/{isup,qsig})
         (d)  miscellaneous text content (Content-Type: message/sipfrag,
              message/http, text/plain, ...)

         When logging a message body (Tag=01), the associated "Value"
         field is populated with the Content-Type itself plus the SIP
         message body separated with a linear white space (LWS)
         separator.  In this manner, everything about all four body
         types is self-described using a single tag as compared to
         enumerating a separate tag for each body type.  Additionally,
         the corresponding "Length" field includes the SIP message body,
         the length of the embedded Content-Type, and the LWS separator
         between the MIME type and the body content.  Note that binary
         bodies would have to be byte encoded to render them in the
         ASCII file.

      Tag = 02 - Log entire SIP message

         Logging the message body (Tag=01) or the entire SIP message
         (Tag=02) MUST conform to the maximum size limitation of 4096
         bytes for a SIP CLF field, as detailed in Section 8 of
         [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].  These can be repeated
         multiple times to accommodate SIP messages or bodies that
         exceed 4096 bytes in length.














Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 17]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   (2)  Vendor-ID = PEN

      A Vendor-ID set to a vendor's own private enterprise number from
      the complete current list of private enterprise numbers maintained
      by IANA [PEN] is used to log any other vendor-specified optional
      element of a SIP header or body.  The value of the Tag is set at
      the discretion of the implementer:

      Tag = Vendor-specified tag

   The remaining fields in the format shown in Figure 5 are defined
   below:

   Length Field (4 bytes):  Indicates the length of only the "Value"
      field of this optionally logged element, hexadecimal encoded.
      This length does not include the header shown in Figure 5.

   Value Field (0 to 4096 bytes):  Contains the actual value of this
      optional field.  As with the mandatory fields, ASCII Tab
      characters (0x09) are replaced with ASCII space characters (0x20).

   The following are examples of optionally logged SIP elements using
   the syntax described in this section.  All these examples only show
   the <OptionalFields> portion of the SIP CLF record.  The mandatory
   <IndexPointers> and <MandatoryFields> portions of the SIP CLF are
   intentionally omitted for the sake of brevity.  Note that all of
   these examples of optionally logged fields begin with a leading Tab
   delimiter byte (0x09) that is not apparent here.

   (1)  Contact header field logged as an optional field:


           Consider the SIP response:

           SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
           <allOneLine>
           Via: SIP/2.0/UDP host.example.com;
           branch=z9hG4bKnashds8;received=192.0.2.1
           </allOneLine>
           To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>;tag=a6c85cf
           From: Alice <sip:alice@example.com>;tag=1928301774
           Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710
           Contact: <sip:bob@192.0.2.4>
           CSeq: 314159 INVITE
           Content-Length: 0






Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 18]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


        The Contact header field would be logged as an optional field in
        the following manner:


           00@00000000,001C,Contact: <sip:bob@192.0.2.4>


   (2)  Reason-Phrase logged as an optional field:


        For the same SIP response the Reason-Phrase would be logged as
        an optional field in the following manner:


           00@00000000,0016,Reason-Phrase: Ringing


   (3)  SDP body to be logged as an optional field:


           v=0
           o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 host.example.com
           s=-
           c=IN IP4 host.example.com
           t=0 0
           m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 8 97


        This body has a Content-Type of application/sdp and is of length
        of 123 bytes including all the line-feeds.  When logging this
        body the "Value" field is composed of the Content-Type and the
        body separated by a LWS, which gives it a combined length of 139
        (0x008B) bytes.  This SIP body would be logged as an optional
        field in the following manner:


           <allOneLine>
           01@00000000,008B,application/sdp v=0\r\no=alice 2890844526
           2890844526 IN IP4 host.example.com\r\ns=-\r\n
           c=IN IP4 host.example.com\r\nt=0 0\r\n
           m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 8 97\r\n
           </allOneLine>


        Note that the body is actually logged on a single line and are
        thus captured between <allOneLine/> tags.  The line-feeds are
        escaped using \r\n to delimit the various lines in the message
        body.



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 19]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   (4)  Codec information from the SDP body logged as an optional field:


           Consider the SIP message:

           INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0
           Via: SIP/2.0/UDP host.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8
           To: Bob <bob@example.com>
           From: Alice <alice@example.com>;tag=1928301774
           Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710
           CSeq: 314159 INVITE
           Max-Forwards: 70
           Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:02:03 GMT
           Contact: <sip:alice@host.example.com>
           Content-Type: application/sdp
           Content-Length: 147

           v=0
           o=UserA 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 example.com
           s=Session SDP
           c=IN IP4 host.example.com
           t=0 0
           m=audio 49172 RTP/AVP 0
           a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000


        A vendor may choose to log a SIP message element such as the
        codec information from the SDP body.  This Vendor-specified SIP
        element would be logged as an optional field in the following
        manner:


           03@00032473,0014,a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000


   (5)  N-th message received from a particular peer logged as an
        optional field:


        Perhaps a vendor wants to log that this message is the n-th
        message received from a peering partner.  To do so for the SIP
        message shown above, the vendor would log this information as:


           07@00032473,0016,1877 example.com






Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 20]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


        Which would signify that this is the 1,877th message from the
        peering partner example.com.  Note that the previous two
        examples showing an optionally logged Vendor-specified SIP
        element use a Vendor-ID with a Private Enterprise Number of
        32473.  This value has been reserved by IANA to be used as an
        example PEN in documentation according to [RFC5612].













































Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 21]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


5.  Example SIP CLF Record

   The following SIP message is an INVITE request sent by a SIP client:


       INVITE sip:192.0.2.10 SIP/2.0
       To: <sip:192.0.2.10>
       Call-ID: DL70dff590c1-1079051554@example.com
       <allOneLine>
       From: "Alice" <sip:1001@example.com:5060>;
       tag=DL88360fa5fc;epid=0x34619b0
       </allOneLine>
       CSeq: 1 INVITE
       Max-Forwards: 70
       <allOneLine>
       Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 192.0.2.200:5060;
       branch=z9hG4bK-1f6be070c4-DL
       </allOneLine>
       Contact: "1001" <sip:1001@192.0.2.200:5060>
       <allOneLine>
       Allow: INVITE,CANCEL,ACK,OPTIONS,INFO,SUBSCRIBE,NOTIFY,BYE,
       MESSAGE,UPDATE,REFER
       </allOneLine>
       Supported: replaces,norefersub
       User-Agent: Some Vendor
       Content-Type: application/sdp
       Content-Length: 418

       v=0
       o=1001 1456139204 0 IN IP4 192.0.2.200
       s=-
       c=IN IP4 192.0.2.200
       b=AS:2048
       t=0 0
       m=audio 13756 RTP/AVP 0 101
       a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
       a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
       a=fmtp:101 0-16
       a=x-mpdp:192.0.2.200:13756
       m=video 13758 RTP/AVP 96
       a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
       <allOneLine>
       a=fmtp:96 profile-level-id=420015; max-mbps=47520; max-fs=1584;
       max-dpb=7680
       </allOneLine>
       a=x-mpdp:192.0.2.200:13758





Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 22]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   Shown below is approximately how this message would appear as a
   single record in a SIP CLF logging file if encoded according to the
   syntax described in this document.  Due to internet-draft
   conventions, this log entry has been split into five lines, instead
   of the two lines that actually appear in a log file; and the tab
   characters have been padded out using spaces to simulate their
   appearance in a text terminal.


       A0000FE,0053005C005E006D007D008F009E00A000BA00C700EB00F500FE
       <allOneLine>
       0000000000.010    RORUU    1 INVITE    -    sip:192.0.2.10
       192.0.2.10:5060    192.0.2.200:56485    sip:192.0.2.10    -
       sip:1001@example.com:5060    DL88360fa5fc
       DL70dff590c1-1079051554@example.com    server-tx    client-tx
       </allOneLine>


   A Base64 encoded version of this log entry (without the changes
   required to format it for an internet-draft) is shown below:


    begin-base64 644 clf_record
    QTAwMDBGRSwwMDUzMDA1QzAwNUUwMDZEMDA3RDAwOEYwMDlFMDBBMDAwQkEwMEM3MDBF
    QjAwRjUwMEZFCjAwMDAwMDAwMDAuMDEwICBST1JVVSAgIDEgSU5WSVRFICAgICAgICAt
    ICAgICAgIHNpcDoxOTIuMC4yLjEwICAxOTIuMC4yLjEwOjUwNjAgMTkyLjAuMi4yMDA6
    NTY0ODUgICAgICAgc2lwOjE5Mi4wLjIuMTAgIC0gICAgICAgc2lwOjEwMDFAZXhhbXBs
    ZS5jb206NTA2MCAgICAgICBETDg4MzYwZmE1ZmMgICAgREw3MGRmZjU5MGMxLTEwNzkw
    NTE1NTRAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20gICAgIHNlcnZlci10eCAgICAgICBjbGllbnQtdHgK
    ====



6.  Text Tool Considerations

   This format has been designed to allow text tools to easily process
   logs without needing to understand the indexing format.  Index lines
   may be rapidly discarded by checking the first character of the line:
   index lines will always start with an alphabetical character, while
   field lines will start with a numerical character.

   Within a field line, script tools can quickly split fields at the tab
   characters.  The first 12 fields are positional, and the meaning of
   any subsequent fields can be determined by checking the first four
   characters of the field.  Alternately, these non-positional fields
   can be located using a regular expression.  For example, the "Contact
   value" in a request can be found by searching for the perl regex
   /\t0000,....,([^\t]*)/.



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 23]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


7.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce any new security considerations
   beyond those discussed in [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement].


8.  Operational Guidance

   SIP CLF log files will take up substantive amount of disk space
   depending on traffic volume at a processing entity and the amount of
   information being logged.  As such, any enterprise using SIP CLF
   should establish operational procedures for file rollovers as
   appropriate to the needs of the organization.

   Listing such operational guidelines in this document is out of scope
   for this work.


9.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not require any considerations from IANA.


10.  Acknowledgements

   The authors of this document would like to acknowledge and thank
   Peter Musgrave for his support, guidance, and continued invaluable
   feedback.

   This work benefited from the discussions and invaluable input by the
   various members of the SIPCLF working group.  These include Brian
   Trammell, Eric Burger, Cullen Jennings, Benoit Claise, Saverio
   Niccolini, Dan Burnett.  Special thanks to Hadriel Kaplan, Chris
   Lonvick, Paul E. Jones, John Elwell for their constructive comments,
   suggestions, and reviews that were critical to the formulation and
   refinement of this draft.

   Thanks to Anders Nygren for his early implementation, insight, and
   reviews of the SIP CLF format.












Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 24]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-sipclf-problem-statement]
              Gurbani, V., Burger, E., Anjali, T., Abdelnur, H., and O.
              Festor, "The Common Log Format (CLF) for the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP): Framework and Data Model",
              draft-ietf-sipclf-problem-statement-09 (work in progress),
              December 2011.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              June 2002.

   [RFC5424]  Gerhards, R., "The Syslog Protocol", RFC 5424, March 2009.

11.2.  Informative References

   [PEN]      IANA, "Private Enterprise Numbers",
              http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers , 2009.

   [RFC4474]  Peterson, J. and C. Jennings, "Enhancements for
              Authenticated Identity Management in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4474, August 2006.

   [RFC4475]  Sparks, R., Hawrylyshen, A., Johnston, A., Rosenberg, J.,
              and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
              Torture Test Messages", RFC 4475, May 2006.

   [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
              Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.

   [RFC5612]  Eronen, P. and D. Harrington, "Enterprise Number for
              Documentation Use", RFC 5612, August 2009.

   [RFC5735]  Cotton, M. and L. Vegoda, "Special Use IPv4 Addresses",
              BCP 153, RFC 5735, January 2010.

   [RFC5737]  Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks
              Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737, January 2010.

   [RFC5952]  Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6
              Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010.



Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 25]

Internet-Draft             Format for SIP CLF              December 2011


   [W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
              Maler, E., Yergeau, F., Bray, T., Sperberg-McQueen, C.,
              and J. Paoli, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
              Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-
              xml-20081126, November 2008,
              <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126>.


Authors' Addresses

   Gonzalo Salgueiro
   Cisco Systems
   7200-12 Kit Creek Road
   Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
   US

   Email: gsalguei@cisco.com


   Vijay Gurbani
   Bell Labs, Alcatel-Lucent
   1960 Lucent Lane
   Rm 9C-533
   Naperville, IL  60563
   US

   Email: vkg@bell-labs.com


   Adam Roach
   Tekelec
   17210 Campbell Rd.
   Suite 250
   Dallas, TX  75252
   US

   Email: adam@nostrum.com














Salgueiro, et al.         Expires June 9, 2012                 [Page 26]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/