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

Versions: (draft-roach-sipcore-rfc3265bis) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 RFC 6665

Network Working Group                                        A. B. Roach
Internet-Draft                                                   Tekelec
Expires: August 23, 2010                               February 19, 2010


                    SIP-Specific Event Notification
                    draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-01

Abstract

   This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation
   Protocol (SIP).  The purpose of this extension is to provide an
   extensible framework by which SIP nodes can request notification from
   remote nodes indicating that certain events have occurred.

   Note that the event notification mechanisms defined herein are NOT
   intended to be a general-purpose infrastructure for all classes of
   event subscription and notification.

Status of this Memo

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

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 23, 2010.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 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



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   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 BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.1.  Overview of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.2.  Documentation Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   2.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.  SIP Methods for Event Notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.1.  SUBSCRIBE  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.1.1.  Subscription Duration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.1.2.  Identification of Subscribed Events and Event
               Classes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       3.1.3.  Additional SUBSCRIBE Header Field Values . . . . . . .  9
     3.2.  NOTIFY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.2.1.  Identification of Reported Events, Event Classes,
               and Current State  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   4.  Node Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     4.1.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       4.1.1.  Detecting Support for SIP Events . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       4.1.2.  Creating and Maintaining Subscriptions . . . . . . . . 10
       4.1.3.  Receiving and Processing State Information . . . . . . 13
       4.1.4.  Forking of SUBSCRIBE Messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     4.2.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       4.2.1.  Subscription Establishment and Maintenance . . . . . . 16
       4.2.2.  Sending State Information to Subscribers . . . . . . . 20
       4.2.3.  PINT Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     4.3.  Proxy Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     4.4.  Common Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
       4.4.1.  Dialog Creation and Termination  . . . . . . . . . . . 23
       4.4.2.  Notifier Migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
       4.4.3.  Polling Resource State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
       4.4.4.  Allow-Events header field usage  . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     4.5.  Targeting Subscriptions at Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
       4.5.1.  Using GRUUs to Route to Devices  . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       4.5.2.  Sharing Dialogs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
     4.6.  CANCEL Requests for SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY . . . . . . . . . 28
   5.  Event Packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
     5.1.  Appropriateness of Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
     5.2.  Event Template-packages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


     5.3.  Amount of State to be Conveyed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
       5.3.1.  Complete State Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
       5.3.2.  State Deltas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
     5.4.  Event Package Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
       5.4.1.  Event Package Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       5.4.2.  Event Package Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       5.4.3.  SUBSCRIBE Bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       5.4.4.  Subscription Duration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       5.4.5.  NOTIFY Bodies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       5.4.6.  Notifier processing of SUBSCRIBE requests  . . . . . . 32
       5.4.7.  Notifier generation of NOTIFY requests . . . . . . . . 32
       5.4.8.  Subscriber processing of NOTIFY requests . . . . . . . 32
       5.4.9.  Handling of forked requests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
       5.4.10. Rate of notifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       5.4.11. State Aggregation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       5.4.12. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       5.4.13. Use of URIs to Retrieve State  . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     6.1.  Access Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     6.2.  Notifier Privacy Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     6.3.  Denial-of-Service attacks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
     6.4.  Replay Attacks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
     6.5.  Man-in-the middle attacks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
     6.6.  Confidentiality  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
     7.1.  Event Packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
       7.1.1.  Registration Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
       7.1.2.  Registration Template  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
     7.2.  Reason Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
     7.3.  Header Field Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
     7.4.  Response Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
   8.  Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
     8.1.  New Methods  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
       8.1.1.  SUBSCRIBE method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
       8.1.2.  NOTIFY method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
     8.2.  New Header Fields  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       8.2.1.  "Event" Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       8.2.2.  "Allow-Events" Header Field  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       8.2.3.  "Subscription-State" Header Field  . . . . . . . . . . 43
     8.3.  New Response Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
       8.3.1.  "202 Accepted" Response Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
       8.3.2.  "489 Bad Event" Response Code  . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
     8.4.  Augmented BNF Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
     9.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
   Appendix B.  Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


     B.1.  Bug 711: Allow-Events can't express template support . . . 47
     B.2.  Remove 202 Response Code?  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
     B.3.  Timer N and Resubscribes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
   Appendix C.  Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
     C.1.  Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00 to
           draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
     C.2.  Changes from draft-roach-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00 to
           draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
     C.3.  Changes since RFC 3265 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
       C.3.1.  Bug 666: Clarify use of expires=xxx with terminated  . 48
       C.3.2.  Bug 667: Reason code for unsub/poll not clearly
               spelled out  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
       C.3.3.  Bug 669: Clarify: SUBSCRIBE for a duration might
               be answered with a NOTIFY/expires=0  . . . . . . . . . 48
       C.3.4.  Bug 670: Dialog State Machine needs clarification  . . 48
       C.3.5.  Bug 671: Clarify timeout-based removal of
               subscriptions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
       C.3.6.  Bug 672: Mandate expires= in NOTIFY  . . . . . . . . . 49
       C.3.7.  Bug 673: INVITE 481 response effect clarification  . . 49
       C.3.8.  Bug 677: SUBSCRIBE response matching text in error . . 49
       C.3.9.  Bug 695: Document is not explicit about response
               to NOTIFY at subscription termination  . . . . . . . . 49
       C.3.10. Bug 696: Subscription state machine needs
               clarification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
       C.3.11. Bug 697: Unsubscription behavior could be clarified  . 49
       C.3.12. Bug 699: NOTIFY and SUBSCRIBE are target refresh
               requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
       C.3.13. Bug 722: Inconsistent 423 reason phrase text . . . . . 50
       C.3.14. Bug 741: guidance needed on when to not include
               Allow-Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
       C.3.15. Bug 744: 5xx to NOTIFY terminates a subscription,
               but should not . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
       C.3.16. Bug 752: Detection of forked requests is incorrect . . 50
       C.3.17. Bug 773: Reason code needs IANA registry . . . . . . . 50
       C.3.18. Bug 774: Need new reason for terminating
               subscriptions to resources that never change . . . . . 50
       C.3.19. Clarify handling of Route/Record-Route in NOTIFY . . . 50
       C.3.20. Eliminate implicit subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . 50
       C.3.21. Deprecate dialog re-use  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
       C.3.22. Rationalize dialog creation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
       C.3.23. Refactor behavior sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
       C.3.24. Clarify sections that need to be present in event
               packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
       C.3.25. Make CANCEL handling more explicit . . . . . . . . . . 51
       C.3.26. Remove State Agent Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52





Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


1.  Introduction

   The ability to request asynchronous notification of events proves
   useful in many types of SIP services for which cooperation between
   end-nodes is required.  Examples of such services include automatic
   callback services (based on terminal state events), buddy lists
   (based on user presence events), message waiting indications (based
   on mailbox state change events), and PSTN and Internet
   Internetworking (PINT) [RFC2848] status (based on call state events).

   The methods described in this document provide a framework by which
   notification of these events can be ordered.

   The event notification mechanisms defined herein are NOT intended to
   be a general-purpose infrastructure for all classes of event
   subscription and notification.  Meeting requirements for the general
   problem set of subscription and notification is far too complex for a
   single protocol.  Our goal is to provide a SIP-specific framework for
   event notification which is not so complex as to be unusable for
   simple features, but which is still flexible enough to provide
   powerful services.  Note, however, that event packages based on this
   framework may define arbitrarily elaborate rules which govern the
   subscription and notification for the events or classes of events
   they describe.

   This document does not describe an extension which may be used
   directly; it must be extended by other documents (herein referred to
   as "event packages").  In object-oriented design terminology, it may
   be thought of as an abstract base class which must be derived into an
   instantiatable class by further extensions.  Guidelines for creating
   these extensions are described in Section 5.

1.1.  Overview of Operation

   The general concept is that entities in the network can subscribe to
   resource or call state for various resources or calls in the network,
   and those entities (or entities acting on their behalf) can send
   notifications when those states change.

   A typical flow of messages would be:

   Subscriber          Notifier
       |-----SUBSCRIBE---->|     Request state subscription
       |<-------200--------|     Acknowledge subscription
       |<------NOTIFY----- |     Return current state information
       |--------200------->|
       |<------NOTIFY----- |     Return current state information
       |--------200------->|



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Subscriptions are expired and must be refreshed by subsequent
   SUBSCRIBE messages.

1.2.  Documentation Conventions

   There are several paragraphs throughout this document which provide
   motivational or clarifying text.  Such passages are non-normative,
   and are provided only to assist with reader comprehension.  These
   passages are set off from the remainder of the text by being indented
   thus:

      This is an example of non-normative explanatory text.  It does not
      form part of the specification, and is used only for
      clarification.

   The all-capital terms "MUST", "SHOULD", "MAY", "SHOULD NOT", "MUST
   NOT", and "RECOMMENDED" are used as defined in [RFC2119].  In
   particular, implementors need to take careful note of the meaning of
   "SHOULD" defined in RFC 2119.  To rephrase: violation of SHOULD-
   strength requirements requires careful analysis and clearly
   enumerable reasons.  It is inappropriate to fail to comply with
   "SHOULD"-strength requirements whimsically or for ease of
   implementation.

   The use of quotation marks next to periods and commas follows the
   convention used by the American Mathematical Society; although
   contrary to traditional American English convention, this usage lends
   clarity to certain passages.


2.  Definitions

   Event Package:  An event package is an additional specification which
      defines a set of state information to be reported by a notifier to
      a subscriber.  Event packages also define further syntax and
      semantics based on the framework defined by this document required
      to convey such state information.

   Event Template-Package:  An event template-package is a special kind
      of event package which defines a set of states which may be
      applied to all possible event packages, including itself.

   Notification:  Notification is the act of a notifier sending a NOTIFY
      message to a subscriber to inform the subscriber of the state of a
      resource.






Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Notifier:  A notifier is a user agent which generates NOTIFY requests
      for the purpose of notifying subscribers of the state of a
      resource.  Notifiers typically also accept SUBSCRIBE requests to
      create subscriptions.

   Subscriber:  A subscriber is a user agent which receives NOTIFY
      requests from notifiers; these NOTIFY requests contain information
      about the state of a resource in which the subscriber is
      interested.  Subscribers typically also generate SUBSCRIBE
      requests and send them to notifiers to create subscriptions.

   Subscription:  A subscription is a set of application state
      associated with a dialog.  This application state includes a
      pointer to the associated dialog, the event package name, and
      possibly an identification token.  Event packages will define
      additional subscription state information.  By definition,
      subscriptions exist in both a subscriber and a notifier.

   Subscription Migration:  Subscription migration is the act of moving
      a subscription from one notifier to another notifier.


3.  SIP Methods for Event Notification

3.1.  SUBSCRIBE

   The SUBSCRIBE method is used to request current state and state
   updates from a remote node.  SUBSCRIBE is a target refresh request,
   as that term is defined in SIP [RFC3261].

3.1.1.  Subscription Duration

   SUBSCRIBE requests SHOULD contain an "Expires" header field (defined
   in SIP [RFC3261]).  This expires value indicates the duration of the
   subscription.  In order to keep subscriptions effective beyond the
   duration communicated in the "Expires" header field, subscribers need
   to refresh subscriptions on a periodic basis using a new SUBSCRIBE
   message on the same dialog as defined in SIP [RFC3261].

   If no "Expires" header field is present in a SUBSCRIBE request, the
   implied default is defined by the event package being used.

   200-class responses to SUBSCRIBE requests also MUST contain an
   "Expires" header field.  The period of time in the response MAY be
   shorter but MUST NOT be longer than specified in the request.  The
   notifier is explicitly allowed to shorten the duration to zero.  The
   period of time in the response is the one which defines the duration
   of the subscription.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   An "expires" parameter on the "Contact" header field has no semantics
   for SUBSCRIBE and is explicitly not equivalent to an "Expires" header
   field in a SUBSCRIBE request or response.

   A natural consequence of this scheme is that a SUBSCRIBE with an
   "Expires" of 0 constitutes a request to unsubscribe from an event.

      In addition to being a request to unsubscribe, a SUBSCRIBE message
      with "Expires" of 0 also causes a fetch of state; see
      Section 4.4.3.

   Notifiers may also wish to cancel subscriptions to events; this is
   useful, for example, when the resource to which a subscription refers
   is no longer available.  Further details on this mechanism are
   discussed in Section 4.2.2.

3.1.2.  Identification of Subscribed Events and Event Classes

   Identification of events is provided by three pieces of information:
   Request URI, Event Type, and (optionally) message body.

   The Request URI of a SUBSCRIBE request, most importantly, contains
   enough information to route the request to the appropriate entity per
   the request routing procedures outlined in SIP [RFC3261].  It also
   contains enough information to identify the resource for which event
   notification is desired, but not necessarily enough information to
   uniquely identify the nature of the event (e.g.,
   "sip:adam@example.com" would be an appropriate URI to subscribe to
   for my presence state; it would also be an appropriate URI to
   subscribe to the state of my voice mailbox).

   Subscribers MUST include exactly one "Event" header field in
   SUBSCRIBE requests, indicating to which event or class of events they
   are subscribing.  The "Event" header field will contain a token which
   indicates the type of state for which a subscription is being
   requested.  This token will be registered with the IANA and will
   correspond to an event package which further describes the semantics
   of the event or event class.

   If the event package to which the event token corresponds defines
   behavior associated with the body of its SUBSCRIBE requests, those
   semantics apply.

   Event packages may also define parameters for the Event header field;
   if they do so, they must define the semantics for such parameters.






Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


3.1.3.  Additional SUBSCRIBE Header Field Values

   Because SUBSCRIBE requests create a dialog as defined in SIP
   [RFC3261], they MAY contain an "Accept" header field.  This header
   field, if present, indicates the body formats allowed in subsequent
   NOTIFY requests.  Event packages MUST define the behavior for
   SUBSCRIBE requests without "Accept" header fields; usually, this will
   connote a single, default body type.

   Header values not described in this document are to be interpreted as
   described in SIP [RFC3261].

3.2.  NOTIFY

   NOTIFY messages are sent to inform subscribers of changes in state to
   which the subscriber has a subscription.  Subscriptions are typically
   put in place using the SUBSCRIBE method; however, it is possible that
   other means have been used.

   NOTIFY is a target refresh request, as that term is defined in SIP
   [RFC3261].

   A NOTIFY does not terminate its corresponding subscription; in other
   words, a single SUBSCRIBE request may trigger several NOTIFY
   requests.

3.2.1.  Identification of Reported Events, Event Classes, and Current
        State

   Identification of events being reported in a notification is very
   similar to that described for subscription to events (see
   Section 3.1.2).

   As in SUBSCRIBE requests, NOTIFY "Event" header fields will contain a
   single event package name for which a notification is being
   generated.  The package name in the "Event" header field MUST match
   the "Event" header field in the corresponding SUBSCRIBE message.

   Event packages may define semantics associated with the body of their
   NOTIFY requests; if they do so, those semantics apply.  NOTIFY bodies
   are expected to provide additional details about the nature of the
   event which has occurred and the resultant resource state.

   When present, the body of the NOTIFY request MUST be formatted into
   one of the body formats specified in the "Accept" header field of the
   corresponding SUBSCRIBE request.  This body will contain either the
   state of the subscribed resource or a pointer to such state in the
   form of a URI (see Section 5.4.13).



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


4.  Node Behavior

4.1.  Subscriber Behavior

4.1.1.  Detecting Support for SIP Events

   The extension described in this document does not make use of the use
   of "Require" or "Proxy-Require" header fields; similarly, there is no
   token defined for "Supported" header fields.  Potential subscribers
   may probe for the support of SIP Events using the OPTIONS request
   defined in SIP [RFC3261].

   The presence of "SUBSCRIBE" in the "Allow" header field of any
   request or response indicates support for SIP Events; further, in the
   absence of an "Allow" header field, the simple presence of an "Allow-
   Events" header field is sufficient to indicate that the node that
   sent the message is capable of acting as a notifier (see
   Section 4.4.4.

      The "methods" parameter for Contact may also be used to
      specifically announce support for SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY messages
      when registering.  (See [RFC3840] for details on the "methods"
      parameter).

4.1.2.  Creating and Maintaining Subscriptions

   From the subscriber's perspective, a subscription proceeds according
   to the following state diagram:























Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


                          +-------------+
                          |    init     |<-----------------------+
                          +-------------+                        |
                                 |                           Retry-after
                           Send SUBSCRIBE                    expires
                                 |                               |
                                 V          Timer N Fires;       |
                          +-------------+   SUBSCRIBE failure    |
             +------------| notify_wait |-- response; --------+  |
             |            +-------------+   or NOTIFY,        |  |
             |                   |          state=terminated  |  |
             |                   |                            |  |
   ++========|===================|============================|==|====++
   ||        |                   |                            V  |    ||
   ||  Receive NOTIFY,    Receive NOTIFY,             +-------------+ ||
   ||  state=active       state=pending               | terminated  | ||
   ||        |                   |                    +-------------+ ||
   ||        |                   |                              A  A  ||
   ||        |                   V          Receive NOTIFY,     |  |  ||
   ||        |            +-------------+   state=terminated;   |  |  ||
   ||        |            |   pending   |-- or 481 response ----+  |  ||
   ||        |            +-------------+   to SUBSCRIBE           |  ||
   ||        |                   |          refresh                |  ||
   ||        |            Receive NOTIFY,                          |  ||
   ||        |            state=active                             |  ||
   ||        |                   |                                 |  ||
   ||        |                   V          Receive NOTIFY,        |  ||
   ||        |            +-------------+   state=terminated;      |  ||
   ||        +----------->|   active    |-- or 481 response -------+  ||
   ||                     +-------------+   to SUBSCRIBE              ||
   ||                                       refresh                   ||
   || Subscription                                                    ||
   ++=================================================================++

   Any transition from "notify_wait" into a "pending" or "active" state
   results in a new subscription.  Note that multiple subscriptions can
   be generated as the result of a single SUBSCRIBE request (see
   Section 4.4.1).  Each of these new subscriptions exists in its own
   independent state machine.

4.1.2.1.  Requesting a Subscription

   SUBSCRIBE is a dialog-creating method, as described in SIP [RFC3261].

   When a subscriber wishes to subscribe to a particular state for a
   resource, it forms a SUBSCRIBE message.  If the initial SUBSCRIBE
   represents a request outside of a dialog (as it typically will), its
   construction follows the procedures outlined in SIP [RFC3261] for UAC



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   request generation outside of a dialog.

   This SUBSCRIBE request will be confirmed with a final response. 200-
   class responses indicate that the subscription has been accepted, and
   that a NOTIFY will be sent immediately.  A 200 response indicates
   that the subscription has been accepted and that the user is
   authorized to subscribe to the requested resource.  A 202 response
   merely indicates that the subscription has been understood, and that
   authorization may or may not have been granted.

   The "Expires" header field in a 200-class response to SUBSCRIBE
   indicates the actual duration for which the subscription will remain
   active (unless refreshed).

   Non-200 class final responses indicate that no subscription or dialog
   has been created, and no subsequent NOTIFY message will be sent.  All
   non-200 class responses (with the exception of "489", described
   herein) have the same meanings and handling as described in SIP
   [RFC3261].  For the sake of clarity: if a SUBSCRIBE request contains
   an "Accept" header field, but that field does not indicate a MIME
   type that the notifier is capable of generating in its NOTIFY
   requests, then the proper error response is 406 (Not Acceptable).

4.1.2.2.  Refreshing of Subscriptions

   At any time before a subscription expires, the subscriber may refresh
   the timer on such a subscription by sending another SUBSCRIBE request
   on the same dialog as the existing subscription.  The handling for
   such a request is the same as for the initial creation of a
   subscription except as described below.

   If a SUBSCRIBE request to refresh a subscription receives a 404, 405,
   410, 416, 480-485, 489, 501, or 604 response, the subscriber should
   consider the subscription terminated.  (See [RFC5057] for further
   details and notes about the effect of error codes on dialogs and
   usages within dialog, such as subscriptions).  If the subscriber
   wishes to re-subscribe to the state, he does so by composing an
   unrelated initial SUBSCRIBE request with a freshly-generated Call-ID
   and a new, unique "From" tag (see Section 4.1.2.1.)

   If a SUBSCRIBE request to refresh a subscription fails with any error
   code other than those listed above, the original subscription is
   still considered valid for the duration of the most recently known
   "Expires" value as negotiated by SUBSCRIBE and its response, or as
   communicated by NOTIFY in the "Subscription-State" header field
   "expires" parameter.





Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


      Note that many such errors indicate that there may be a problem
      with the network or the notifier such that no further NOTIFY
      messages will be received.

4.1.2.3.  Unsubscribing

   Unsubscribing is handled in the same way as refreshing of a
   subscription, with the "Expires" header field set to "0".  Note that
   a successful unsubscription will also trigger a final NOTIFY message.

   The final NOTIFY may or may not contain information about the state
   of the resource; subscribers need to be prepared to receive final
   NOTIFY messages both with and without state.

4.1.2.4.  Confirmation of Subscription Creation

   The subscriber can expect to receive a NOTIFY message from each node
   which has processed a successful subscription or subscription
   refresh.  To ensure that subscribers do not wait indefinitely for a
   subscription to be established, a subscriber starts a Timer N, set to
   64*T1.  If this Timer N expires prior to the receipt of a NOTIFY
   message, the subscriber considers the subscription failed, and cleans
   up any state associated with the subscription attempt.

   Until Timer N expires, several NOTIFY messages may arrive from
   different destinations (see Section 4.4.1).  Each of these messages
   establish a new dialog and a new subscription.  After the expiration
   of Timer N, the subscriber SHOULD reject any such NOTIFY messages
   that would otherwise establish a new dialog with a "481" response
   code.

   Until the first NOTIFY message arrives, the subscriber should
   consider the state of the subscribed resource to be in a neutral
   state.  Documents which define new event packages MUST define this
   "neutral state" in such a way that makes sense for their application
   (see Section 5.4.7).

   Due to the potential for both out-of-order messages and forking, the
   subscriber MUST be prepared to receive NOTIFY messages before the
   SUBSCRIBE transaction has completed.

   Except as noted above, processing of this NOTIFY is the same as in
   Section 4.1.3.

4.1.3.  Receiving and Processing State Information

   Subscribers receive information about the state of a resource to
   which they have subscribed in the form of NOTIFY requests.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Upon receiving a NOTIFY request, the subscriber should check that it
   matches at least one of its outstanding subscriptions; if not, it
   MUST return a "481 Subscription does not exist" response unless
   another 400- or 500-class response is more appropriate.  The rules
   for matching NOTIFY requests with subscriptions that create a new
   dialog are described in Section 4.4.1.  Notifications for
   subscriptions which were created inside an existing dialog match if
   they are in the same dialog and the "Event" header fields match (as
   described in Section 8.2.1).

   If, for some reason, the event package designated in the "Event"
   header field of the NOTIFY request is not supported, the subscriber
   will respond with a "489 Bad Event" response.

   To prevent spoofing of events, NOTIFY requests SHOULD be
   authenticated, using any defined SIP authentication mechanism.

   NOTIFY requests MUST contain "Subscription-State" header fields which
   indicate the status of the subscription.

   If the "Subscription-State" header field value is "active", it means
   that the subscription has been accepted and (in general) has been
   authorized.  If the header field also contains an "expires"
   parameter, the subscriber SHOULD take it as the authoritative
   subscription duration and adjust accordingly.  The "retry-after" and
   "reason" parameters have no semantics for "active".

   If the "Subscription-State" value is "pending", the subscription has
   been received by the notifier, but there is insufficient policy
   information to grant or deny the subscription yet.  If the header
   field also contains an "expires" parameter, the subscriber SHOULD
   take it as the authoritative subscription duration and adjust
   accordingly.  No further action is necessary on the part of the
   subscriber.  The "retry-after" and "reason" parameters have no
   semantics for "pending".

   If the "Subscription-State" value is "terminated", the subscriber
   should consider the subscription terminated.  The "expires" parameter
   has no semantics for "terminated" -- notifiers SHOULD NOT include an
   "expires" parameter on a "Subscription-State" header field with a
   value of "terminated," and subscribers MUST ignore any such
   parameter, if present.  If a reason code is present, the client
   should behave as described below.  If no reason code or an unknown
   reason code is present, the client MAY attempt to re-subscribe at any
   time (unless a "retry-after" parameter is present, in which case the
   client SHOULD NOT attempt re-subscription until after the number of
   seconds specified by the "retry-after" parameter).  The reason codes
   defined by this document are:



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   deactivated:  The subscription has been terminated, but the
      subscriber SHOULD retry immediately with a new subscription.  One
      primary use of such a status code is to allow migration of
      subscriptions between nodes.  The "retry-after" parameter has no
      semantics for "deactivated".

   probation:  The subscription has been terminated, but the client
      SHOULD retry at some later time.  If a "retry-after" parameter is
      also present, the client SHOULD wait at least the number of
      seconds specified by that parameter before attempting to re-
      subscribe.

   rejected:  The subscription has been terminated due to change in
      authorization policy.  Clients SHOULD NOT attempt to re-subscribe.
      The "retry-after" parameter has no semantics for "rejected".

   timeout:  The subscription has been terminated because it was not
      refreshed before it expired.  Clients MAY re-subscribe
      immediately.  The "retry-after" parameter has no semantics for
      "timeout".  This reason code is also associated with polling of
      resource state, as detailed in Section 4.4.3

   giveup:  The subscription has been terminated because the notifier
      could not obtain authorization in a timely fashion.  If a "retry-
      after" parameter is also present, the client SHOULD wait at least
      the number of seconds specified by that parameter before
      attempting to re-subscribe; otherwise, the client MAY retry
      immediately, but will likely get put back into pending state.

   noresource:  The subscription has been terminated because the
      resource state which was being monitored no longer exists.
      Clients SHOULD NOT attempt to re-subscribe.  The "retry-after"
      parameter has no semantics for "noresource".

   invariant:  The subscription has been terminated because the resource
      state is guaranteed not to change for the foreseeable future.
      This may be the case, for example, when subscribing to the
      location information of a fixed-location land-line telephone.
      When using this reason code, notifiers are advised to include a
      "retry-after" parameter with a large value (for example, 31536000
      -- or one year) to prevent older, RFC 3265-compliant clients from
      periodically resubscribing.  Clients SHOULD NOT attempt to
      resubscribe after receiving a reason code of "invariant,"
      regardless of the presence of or value of a "retry-after"
      parameter.

   Other specifications may define new reason codes for use with the
   "Subscription-State" header field.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Once the notification is deemed acceptable to the subscriber, the
   subscriber SHOULD return a 200 response.  In general, it is not
   expected that NOTIFY responses will contain bodies; however, they
   MAY, if the NOTIFY request contained an "Accept" header field.

   Other responses defined in SIP [RFC3261] may also be returned, as
   appropriate.  In no case should a NOTIFY transaction extend for any
   longer than the time necessary for automated processing.  In
   particular, subscribers MUST NOT wait for a user response before
   returning a final response to a NOTIFY request.

4.1.4.  Forking of SUBSCRIBE Messages

   In accordance with the rules for proxying non-INVITE requests as
   defined in SIP [RFC3261], successful SUBSCRIBE requests will receive
   only one 200-class response; however, due to forking, the
   subscription may have been accepted by multiple nodes.  The
   subscriber MUST therefore be prepared to receive NOTIFY requests with
   "From:" tags which differ from the "To:" tag received in the
   SUBSCRIBE 200-class response.

   If multiple NOTIFY messages are received in different dialogs in
   response to a single SUBSCRIBE message, each dialog represents a
   different destination to which the SUBSCRIBE request was forked.
   Subscriber handling in such situations varies by event package; see
   Section 5.4.9 for details.

4.2.  Notifier Behavior

4.2.1.  Subscription Establishment and Maintenance

   Notifiers learn about subscription requests by receiving SUBSCRIBE
   requests from interested parties.  Notifiers MUST NOT create
   subscriptions except upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE message.  However,
   for historical reasons, the implicit creation of subscriptions as
   defined in [RFC3515] is still permitted.

      [RFC3265] allowed the creation of subscriptions using means other
      than SUBSCRIBE.  The only standardized use of this mechanism is
      the REFER method [RFC3515].  Implementation experience with REFER
      has shown that the implicit creation of a subscription has a
      number of undesirable effects, such as the inability to signal the
      success of a REFER while signaling a problem with the
      subscription; and difficulty performing one action without the
      other.  Additionally, the proper exchange of dialog identifiers is
      difficult without dialog re-use (which has its own set of
      problems; see Section 4.5).




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


4.2.1.1.  Initial SUBSCRIBE Transaction Processing

   In no case should a SUBSCRIBE transaction extend for any longer than
   the time necessary for automated processing.  In particular,
   notifiers MUST NOT wait for a user response before returning a final
   response to a SUBSCRIBE request.

      This requirement is imposed primarily to prevent the non-INVITE
      transaction timeout timer F (see [RFC3261]) from firing during the
      SUBSCRIBE transaction, since interaction with a user would often
      exceed 64*T1 seconds.

   The notifier SHOULD check that the event package specified in the
   "Event" header field is understood.  If not, the notifier SHOULD
   return a "489 Bad Event" response to indicate that the specified
   event/event class is not understood.

   The notifier SHOULD also perform any necessary authentication and
   authorization per its local policy.  See Section 4.2.1.3.

   The notifier MAY also check that the duration in the "Expires" header
   field is not too small.  If and only if the expiration interval is
   greater than zero AND smaller than one hour AND less than a notifier-
   configured minimum, the notifier MAY return a "423 Interval Too
   Brief" error which contains a "Min-Expires" header field field.  The
   "Min-Expires" header field is described in SIP [RFC3261].

   If the notifier is able to immediately determine that it understands
   the event package, that the authenticated subscriber is authorized to
   subscribe, and that there are no other barriers to creating the
   subscription, it creates the subscription and a dialog (if
   necessary), and returns a "200 OK" response (unless doing so would
   reveal authorization policy in an undesirable fashion; see
   Section 6.2).

   If the notifier cannot immediately create the subscription (e.g., it
   needs to wait for user input for authorization, or is acting for
   another node which is not currently reachable), or wishes to mask
   authorization policy, it will return a "202 Accepted" response.  This
   response indicates that the request has been received and understood,
   but does not necessarily imply that the subscription has been
   authorized yet.

   When a subscription is created in the notifier, it stores the event
   package name as part of the subscription information.

   The "Expires" values present in SUBSCRIBE 200-class responses behave
   in the same way as they do in REGISTER responses: the server MAY



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 17]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   shorten the interval, but MUST NOT lengthen it.

      If the duration specified in a SUBSCRIBE message is unacceptably
      short, the notifier may be able to send a 423 response, as
      described earlier in this section.

   200-class responses to SUBSCRIBE requests will not generally contain
   any useful information beyond subscription duration; their primary
   purpose is to serve as a reliability mechanism.  State information
   will be communicated via a subsequent NOTIFY request from the
   notifier.

   The other response codes defined in SIP [RFC3261] may be used in
   response to SUBSCRIBE requests, as appropriate.

4.2.1.2.  Confirmation of Subscription Creation/Refreshing

   Upon successfully accepting or refreshing a subscription, notifiers
   MUST send a NOTIFY message immediately to communicate the current
   resource state to the subscriber.  This NOTIFY message is sent on the
   same dialog as created by the SUBSCRIBE response.  If the resource
   has no meaningful state at the time that the SUBSCRIBE message is
   processed, this NOTIFY message MAY contain an empty or neutral body.
   See Section 4.2.2 for further details on NOTIFY message generation.

   Note that a NOTIFY message is always sent immediately after any 200-
   class response to a SUBSCRIBE request, regardless of whether the
   subscription has already been authorized.

4.2.1.3.  Authentication/Authorization of SUBSCRIBE requests

   Privacy concerns may require that notifiers apply policy to determine
   whether a particular subscriber is authorized to subscribe to a
   certain set of events.  Such policy may be defined by mechanisms such
   as access control lists or real-time interaction with a user.  In
   general, authorization of subscribers prior to authentication is not
   particularly useful.

   SIP authentication mechanisms are discussed in SIP [RFC3261].  Note
   that, even if the notifier node typically acts as a proxy,
   authentication for SUBSCRIBE requests will always be performed via a
   "401" response, not a "407;" notifiers always act as a user agents
   when accepting subscriptions and sending notifications.








Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 18]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


      Of course, when acting as a proxy, a node will perform normal
      proxy authentication (using 407).  The foregoing explanation is a
      reminder that notifiers are always UAs, and as such perform UA
      authentication.

   If authorization fails based on an access list or some other
   automated mechanism (i.e., it can be automatically authoritatively
   determined that the subscriber is not authorized to subscribe), the
   notifier SHOULD reply to the request with a "403 Forbidden" or "603
   Decline" response, unless doing so might reveal information that
   should stay private; see Section 6.2.

   If the notifier owner is interactively queried to determine whether a
   subscription is allowed, a "202 Accept" response is returned
   immediately.  Note that a NOTIFY message is still formed and sent
   under these circumstances, as described in the previous section.

   If subscription authorization was delayed and the notifier wishes to
   convey that such authorization has been declined, it may do so by
   sending a NOTIFY message containing a "Subscription-State" header
   field with a value of "terminated" and a reason parameter of
   "rejected".

4.2.1.4.  Refreshing of Subscriptions

   When a notifier receives a subscription refresh, assuming that the
   subscriber is still authorized, the notifier updates the expiration
   time for subscription.  As with the initial subscription, the server
   MAY shorten the amount of time until expiration, but MUST NOT
   increase it.  The final expiration time is placed in the "Expires"
   header field in the response.  If the duration specified in a
   SUBSCRIBE message is unacceptably short, the notifier SHOULD respond
   with a "423 Interval Too Brief" message.

   If no refresh for a notification address is received before its
   expiration time, the subscription is removed.  When removing a
   subscription, the notifier SHOULD send a NOTIFY message with a
   "Subscription-State" value of "terminated" to inform it that the
   subscription is being removed.  If such a message is sent, the
   "Subscription-State" header field SHOULD contain a "reason=timeout"
   parameter.

   Clients can cause a subscription to be terminated immediately by
   sending a SUBSCRIBE with an "Expires" header field set to '0'.
   Notifiers largely treat this the same way as any other subscription
   expiration: they send a NOTIFY message containing a "Subscription-
   State" of "terminated", with a reason code of "timeout."  For
   consistency with state polling (see Section 4.4.3) and subscription



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 19]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   refreshes, the notifier may choose to include resource state in this
   final NOTIFY.  However, in some cases, including such state makes no
   sense.  Under such circumstances, the notifier may choose to omit
   state information from the terminal NOTIFY message.

      The sending of a NOTIFY when a subscription expires allows the
      corresponding dialog to be terminated, if appropriate.

4.2.2.  Sending State Information to Subscribers

   Notifiers use the NOTIFY method to send information about the state
   of a resource to subscribers.  The notifier's view of a subscription
   is shown in the following state diagram:

                         +-------------+
                         |    init     |
                         +-------------+
                                |
                          Receive SUBSCRIBE,
                          Send NOTIFY
                                |
                                V          NOTIFY failure,
                         +-------------+   subscription expires,
            +------------|  resp_wait  |-- or terminated ----+
            |            +-------------+   per local policy  |
            |                   |                            |
            |                   |                            |
            |                   |                            V
      Policy grants       Policy needed              +-------------+
      permission                |                    | terminated  |
            |                   |                    +-------------+
            |                   |                               A A
            |                   V          NOTIFY failure,      | |
            |            +-------------+   subscription expires,| |
            |            |   pending   |-- or terminated -------+ |
            |            +-------------+   per local policy       |
            |                   |                                 |
            |            Policy changed to                        |
            |            grant permission                         |
            |                   |                                 |
            |                   V          NOTIFY failure,        |
            |            +-------------+   subscription expires,  |
            +----------->|   active    |-- or terminated ---------+
                         +-------------+   per local policy

   When a SUBSCRIBE request is answered with a 200-class response, the
   notifier MUST immediately construct and send a NOTIFY request to the
   subscriber.  When a change in the subscribed state occurs, the



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 20]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   notifier SHOULD immediately construct and send a NOTIFY request,
   subject to authorization, local policy, and throttling
   considerations.

   If the NOTIFY request fails due to expiration of SIP Timer F
   (transaction timeout), the notifier SHOULD remove the subscription.

      This behavior prevents unnecessary transmission of state
      information for subscribers who have crashed or disappeared from
      the network.  Because such transmissions will be sent multiple
      times, per the retransmission algorithm defined in SIP [RFC3261]
      (instead of the typical single transmission for functioning
      clients), continuing to service them when no client is available
      to acknowledge them could place undue strain on a network.  Upon
      client restart or reestablishment of a network connection, it is
      expected that clients will send SUBSCRIBE messages to refresh
      potentially stale state information; such messages will re-install
      subscriptions in all relevant nodes.

   If the NOTIFY transaction fails due to the receipt of a 404, 405,
   410, 416, 480-485, 489, 501, or 604 response to the NOTIFY, the
   notifier MUST remove the corresponding subscription.  See [RFC5057]
   for further details and notes about the effect of error codes on
   dialogs and usages within dialog (such as subscriptions).

      A notify error response would generally indicate that something
      has gone wrong with the subscriber or with some proxy on the way
      to the subscriber.  If the subscriber is in error, it makes the
      most sense to allow the subscriber to rectify the situation (by
      re-subscribing) once the error condition has been handled.  If a
      proxy is in error, the periodic SUBSCRIBE refreshes will re-
      install subscription state once the network problem has been
      resolved.

   NOTIFY requests MUST contain a "Subscription-State" header field with
   a value of "active", "pending", or "terminated".  The "active" value
   indicates that the subscription has been accepted and has been
   authorized (in most cases; see Section 6.2).  The "pending" value
   indicates that the subscription has been received, but that policy
   information is insufficient to accept or deny the subscription at
   this time.  The "terminated" value indicates that the subscription is
   not active.

   If the value of the "Subscription-State" header field is "active" or
   "pending", the notifier MUST also include in the "Subscription-State"
   header field an "expires" parameter which indicates the time
   remaining on the subscription.  The notifier MAY use this mechanism
   to shorten a subscription; however, this mechanism MUST NOT be used



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 21]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   to lengthen a subscription.

      Including expiration information for active and pending
      subscriptions is necessary in case the SUBSCRIBE request forks,
      since the response to a forked SUBSCRIBE may not be received by
      the subscriber.  [RFC3265] allowed the notifier some discretion in
      the inclusion of this parameter, so subscriber implementations are
      warned to handle the lack of an "expires" parameter gracefully.
      Note well that this "expires" value is a parameter on the
      "Subscription-State" header field, NOT an "Expires" header field.

      The period of time for a subscription can be shortened to zero by
      the notifier.  In other words, it is perfectly valid for a
      SUBSCRIBE with a non-zero expires to be answered with a NOTIFY
      that contains "Subscription-Status: terminated;reason=expired".
      This merely means that the notifier has shortened the subscription
      timeout to zero, and the subscription has expired instantaneously.
      The body may contain valid state, or it may contain a neutral
      state (see Section 5.4.7).

   If the value of the "Subscription-State" header field is
   "terminated", the notifier SHOULD also include a "reason" parameter.
   The notifier MAY also include a "retry-after" parameter, where
   appropriate.  For details on the value and semantics of the "reason"
   and "retry-after" parameters, see Section 4.1.3.

4.2.3.  PINT Compatibility

   The "Event" header field is considered mandatory for the purposes of
   this document.  However, to maintain compatibility with PINT (see
   [RFC2848]), notifiers MAY interpret a SUBSCRIBE request with no
   "Event" header field as requesting a subscription to PINT events.  If
   a notifier does not support PINT, it SHOULD return "489 Bad Event" to
   any SUBSCRIBE messages without an "Event" header field.

4.3.  Proxy Behavior

   Proxies need no additional behavior beyond that described in SIP
   [RFC3261] to support SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY.  If a proxy wishes to see
   all of the SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests for a given dialog, it MUST
   add a Record-Route header field to the initial SUBSCRIBE request and
   all NOTIFY requests.  It MAY choose to include Record-Route in
   subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages; however, these requests cannot cause
   the dialog's route set to be modified.

   Proxies that did not add a Record-Route header field to the initial
   SUBSCRIBE request MUST NOT add a Record-Route header field to any of
   the associated NOTIFY requests.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 22]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


      Note that subscribers and notifiers may elect to use S/MIME
      encryption of SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests; consequently, proxies
      cannot rely on being able to access any information that is not
      explicitly required to be proxy-readable by SIP [RFC3261].

4.4.  Common Behavior

4.4.1.  Dialog Creation and Termination

   Dialogs are created upon completion of a NOTIFY transaction for a new
   subscription, unless the NOTIFY contains a "Subscription-State" of
   "terminated."

   Because the dialog is established by the NOTIFY request, the route
   set at the subscriber is taken from the NOTIFY request itself, as
   opposed to the route set present in the 200-class response to the
   SUBSCRIBE request.

   NOTIFY requests are matched to such SUBSCRIBE requests if they
   contain the same "Call-ID", a "To" header field "tag" parameter which
   matches the "From" header field "tag" parameter of the SUBSCRIBE, and
   the same "Event" header field.  Rules for comparisons of the "Event"
   header fields are described in Section 8.2.1.

   A subscription is destroyed after a notifier sends a NOTIFY request
   with a "Subscription-State" of "terminated."  The subscriber will
   generally answer such final requests with a "200 OK" response (unless
   a condition warranting an alternate response has arisen).  Except
   when the mechanism described in Section 4.5.2 is used, the
   destruction of a subscription results in the termination of its
   associated dialog.

      A subscriber may send a SUBSCRIBE request with an "Expires" header
      field of 0 in order to trigger the sending of such a NOTIFY
      request; however, for the purposes of subscription and dialog
      lifetime, the subscription is not considered terminated until the
      NOTIFY transaction with a "Subscription-State" of "terminated"
      completes.

4.4.2.  Notifier Migration

   It is often useful to allow migration of subscriptions between
   notifiers.  Such migration may be effected by sending a NOTIFY
   message with a "Subscription-State" header field of "terminated", and
   a reason parameter of "deactivated".  This NOTIFY request is
   otherwise normal, and is formed as described in Section 4.2.2.

   Upon receipt of this NOTIFY message, the subscriber SHOULD attempt to



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 23]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   re-subscribe (as described in the preceding sections).  Note that
   this subscription is established on a new dialog, and does not re-use
   the route set from the previous subscription dialog.

   The actual migration is effected by making a change to the policy
   (such as routing decisions) of one or more servers to which the
   SUBSCRIBE request will be sent in such a way that a different node
   ends up responding to the SUBSCRIBE request.  This may be as simple
   as a change in the local policy in the notifier from which the
   subscription is migrating so that it serves as a proxy or redirect
   server instead of a notifier.

   Whether, when, and why to perform notifier migrations may be
   described in individual event packages; otherwise, such decisions are
   a matter of local notifier policy, and are left up to individual
   implementations.

4.4.3.  Polling Resource State

   A natural consequence of the behavior described in the preceding
   sections is that an immediate fetch without a persistent subscription
   may be effected by sending a SUBSCRIBE with an "Expires" of 0.

   Of course, an immediate fetch while a subscription is active may be
   effected by sending a SUBSCRIBE with an "Expires" equal to the number
   of seconds remaining in the subscription.

   Upon receipt of this SUBSCRIBE request, the notifier (or notifiers,
   if the SUBSCRIBE request was forked) will send a NOTIFY request
   containing resource state in the same dialog.

   Note that the NOTIFY messages triggered by SUBSCRIBE messages with
   "Expires" header fields of 0 will contain a "Subscription-State"
   value of "terminated", and a "reason" parameter of "timeout".

   Polling of event state can cause significant increases in load on the
   network and notifiers; as such, it should be used only sparingly.  In
   particular, polling SHOULD NOT be used in circumstances in which it
   will typically result in more network messages than long-running
   subscriptions.

   When polling is used, subscribers SHOULD attempt to cache
   authentication credentials between polls so as to reduce the number
   of messages sent.







Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 24]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


      Due to the requirement on notifiers to send a NOTIFY immediately
      upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE request, the state provided by polling
      is limited to the information that the notifier has immediate
      local access to when it receives the SUBSCRIBE.  If, for example,
      the notifier generally needs to retrieve state from another
      network server, then that state will be absent from the NOTIFY
      that results from polling.

4.4.4.  Allow-Events header field usage

   The "Allow-Events" header field, if present, includes a list of
   tokens which indicates the event packages supported by a notifier.
   In other words, a user agent sending an "Allow-Events" header field
   is advertising that it can process SUBSCRIBE requests and generate
   NOTIFY requests for all of the event packages listed in that header
   field.

   Any user agent that can act as a notifier for one or more event
   packages SHOULD include an appropriate "Allow-Events" header field
   indicating all supported events in all methods which initiate dialogs
   and their responses (such as INVITE) and OPTIONS responses.

      This information is very useful, for example, in allowing user
      agents to render particular interface elements appropriately
      according to whether the events required to implement the features
      they represent are supported by the appropriate nodes.
      On the other hand, it doesn't necessarily make much sense to
      indicate supported events inside a NOTIFY-established dialog if
      the only event package supported is the one associated with that
      subscription.

   Note that "Allow-Events" header fields MUST NOT be inserted by
   proxies.

4.5.  Targeting Subscriptions at Devices

   [RFC3265] defined a mechanism by which subscriptions could share
   dialogs with invite usages and with other subscriptions.  The purpose
   of this behavior was to allow subscribers to ensure that a
   subscription arrived at the same device as an established dialog.
   Unfortunately, the re-use of dialogs has proven to be exceedingly
   confusing.  [RFC5057] attempted to clarify proper behavior in a
   variety of circumstances; however, the ensuing rules remain confusing
   and prone to implementation error.  At the same time, the mechanism
   described in [I-D.ietf-sip-gruu] now provides a far more elegant and
   unambiguous means to achieve the same goal.

   Consequently, the dialog re-use technique described in RFC 3265 is



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 25]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   now deprecated.

   This dialog-sharing technique has also historically been used as a
   means for targeting an event package at a dialog.  This usage can be
   seen, for example, in certain applications of the REFER method
   [RFC3515].  With the removal of dialog re-use, an alternate (and more
   explicit) means of targeting dialogs needs to be used for this type
   of correlation.  The appropriate means of such targeting is left up
   to the actual event packages.  Candidates include the "Target-Dialog"
   header field [RFC4528], the "Join" header field [RFC3911], and the
   "Replaces" header field [RFC3891], depending on the semantics
   desired.  Alternately, if the semantics of those header fields do not
   match the event package's purpose for correlation, event packages can
   devise their own means of identifying dialogs.  For an example of
   this approach, see the Dialog Event Package [RFC4235].

4.5.1.  Using GRUUs to Route to Devices

   Notifiers MUST implement the GRUU extension defined in
   [I-D.ietf-sip-gruu], and MUST use a GRUU as their local target.  This
   allows subscribers to explicitly target desired devices.

   If a subscriber wishes to subscribe to a resource on the same device
   as an established dialog, it should check whether the remote contact
   in that dialog is a GRUU (i.e., whether it contains a "gr" URI
   parameter).  If so, the subscriber creates a new dialog, using the
   GRUU as the request URI for the new SUBSCRIBE.

      Because GRUUs are guaranteed to route to a a specific device, this
      ensures that the subscription will be routed to the same place as
      the established dialog.

4.5.2.  Sharing Dialogs

   For compatibility with older clients, subscriber and notifier
   implementations may choose to allow dialog sharing.  The behavior of
   multiple usages within a dialog are described in [RFC5057].

   Subscribers MUST NOT attempt to re-use dialogs whose remote target is
   a GRUU.

      Note that the techniques described in this section are included
      for backwards compatibility purposes only.  Because subscribers
      cannot re-use dialogs with a GRUU for their remote target, and
      because notifiers must use GRUUs as their local target, any two
      implementations that conform to this specification will
      automatically use the mechanism described in Section 4.5.1.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 26]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   If a subscriber wishes to subscribe to a resource on the same device
   as an established dialog and the remote contact is not a GRUU, it MAY
   revert to dialog sharing behavior.  Alternately, it MAY choose to
   treat the remote party as incapable of servicing the subscription
   (i.e., the same way it would behave if the remote party did not
   support SIP events at all).

   If a notifier receives a SUBSCRIBE request for a new subscription on
   an existing dialog, it MAY choose to implement dialog sharing
   behavior.  Alternately, it may choose to fail the SUBSCRIBE request
   with a 403 response.  The error text of such 403 responses SHOULD
   indicate that dialog sharing is not supported.

   To implement dialog sharing, subscribers and notifiers perform the
   following additional processing:

   o  When subscriptions exist in dialogs associated with INVITE-created
      application state and/or other subscriptions, these sets of
      application state do not interact beyond the behavior described
      for a dialog (e.g., route set handling).  In particular, multiple
      subscriptions within a dialog are expire independently, and
      require independent SUBSCRIBE refreshes.

   o  If a subscription's destruction leaves no other application state
      associated with the dialog, the dialog terminates.  The
      destruction of other application state (such as that created by an
      INVITE) will not terminate the dialog if a subscription is still
      associated with that dialog.  This means that, when dialog are re-
      used, then a dialog created with an INVITE does not necessarily
      terminate upon receipt of a BYE.  Similarly, in the case that
      several subscriptions are associated with a single dialog, the
      dialog does not terminate until all the subscriptions in it are
      destroyed.

   o  Subscribers MAY include an "id" parameter in SUBSCRIBE request
      "Event" header field to allow differentiation between multiple
      subscriptions in the same dialog.  This "id" parameter, if
      present, contains an opaque token which identifies the specific
      subscription within a dialog.  An "id" parameter is only valid
      within the scope of a single dialog.

   o  If an "id" parameter is present in the SUBSCRIBE message used to
      establish a subscription, that "id" parameter MUST also be present
      in all corresponding NOTIFY messages.

   o  When a subscriber refreshes a the subscription timer, the
      SUBSCRIBE MUST contain the same "Event" header field "id"
      parameter as was present in the initial subscription.  (Otherwise,



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 27]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


      the notifier will interpret the SUBSCRIBE message as a request for
      a new subscription in the same dialog).

   o  When a subscription is created in the notifier, it stores the any
      "Event" header field "id" parameter as part of the subscription
      information (along with the event package name).

   o  If an initial SUBSCRIBE is sent on a pre-existing dialog, a
      matching NOTIFY request merely creates a new subscription
      associated with that dialog.


4.6.  CANCEL Requests for SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY

   Neither SUBSCRIBE nor NOTIFY messages can be canceled.  If a UAS
   receives a CANCEL request that matches a known SUBSCRIBE or NOTIFY
   transaction, it MUST respond to the CANCEL request, but otherwise
   ignore it.  In particular, the CANCEL request MUST NOT affect
   processing of the SUBSCRIBE or NOTIFY request in any way.

   UACs SHOULD NOT send CANCEL requests for SUBSCRIBE or NOTIFY
   transactions.


5.  Event Packages

   This section covers several issues which should be taken into
   consideration when event packages based on SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY are
   proposed.  Event package definitions contain sections addressing each
   of these issues, ideally in the same order and with the same titles
   as the following sections.

5.1.  Appropriateness of Usage

   When designing an event package using the methods described in this
   document for event notification, it is important to consider: is SIP
   an appropriate mechanism for the problem set?  Is SIP being selected
   because of some unique feature provided by the protocol (e.g., user
   mobility), or merely because "it can be done?"  If you find yourself
   defining event packages for notifications related to, for example,
   network management or the temperature inside your car's engine, you
   may want to reconsider your selection of protocols.

      Those interested in extending the mechanism defined in this
      document are urged to follow the development of "Guidelines for
      Authors of SIP Extensions" [RFC4485] for further guidance
      regarding appropriate uses of SIP.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 28]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Further, it is expected that this mechanism is not to be used in
   applications where the frequency of reportable events is excessively
   rapid (e.g., more than about once per second).  A SIP network is
   generally going to be provisioned for a reasonable signaling volume;
   sending a notification every time a user's GPS position changes by
   one hundredth of a second could easily overload such a network.

5.2.  Event Template-packages

   Normal event packages define a set of state applied to a specific
   type of resource, such as user presence, call state, and messaging
   mailbox state.

   Event template-packages are a special type of package which define a
   set of state applied to other packages, such as statistics, access
   policy, and subscriber lists.  Event template-packages may even be
   applied to other event template-packages.

   To extend the object-oriented analogy made earlier, event template-
   packages can be thought of as templatized C++ packages which must be
   applied to other packages to be useful.

   The name of an event template-package as applied to a package is
   formed by appending a period followed by the event template-package
   name to the end of the package.  For example, if a template-package
   called "winfo" were being applied to a package called "presence", the
   event token used in "Event" and "Allow-Events" would be
   "presence.winfo".

   Event template-packages must be defined so that they can be applied
   to any arbitrary package.  In other words, event template-packages
   cannot be specifically tied to one or a few "parent" packages in such
   a way that they will not work with other packages.

5.3.  Amount of State to be Conveyed

   When designing event packages, it is important to consider the type
   of information which will be conveyed during a notification.

   A natural temptation is to convey merely the event (e.g., "a new
   voice message just arrived") without accompanying state (e.g., "7
   total voice messages").  This complicates implementation of
   subscribing entities (since they have to maintain complete state for
   the entity to which they have subscribed), and also is particularly
   susceptible to synchronization problems.

   There are two possible solutions to this problem that event packages
   may choose to implement.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 29]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


5.3.1.  Complete State Information

   For packages which typically convey state information that is
   reasonably small (on the order of 1 KB or so), it is suggested that
   event packages are designed so as to send complete state information
   when an event occurs.

   In some circumstances, conveying the current state alone may be
   insufficient for a particular class of events.  In these cases, the
   event packages should include complete state information along with
   the event that occurred.  For example, conveying "no customer service
   representatives available" may not be as useful as conveying "no
   customer service representatives available; representative
   sip:46@cs.xyz.int just logged off".

5.3.2.  State Deltas

   In the case that the state information to be conveyed is large, the
   event package may choose to detail a scheme by which NOTIFY messages
   contain state deltas instead of complete state.

   Such a scheme would work as follows: any NOTIFY sent in immediate
   response to a SUBSCRIBE contains full state information.  NOTIFY
   messages sent because of a state change will contain only the state
   information that has changed; the subscriber will then merge this
   information into its current knowledge about the state of the
   resource.

   Any event package that supports delta changes to states MUST include
   a version number that increases by exactly one for each NOTIFY
   transaction in a subscription.  Note that the state version number
   appears in the body of the message, not in a SIP header field.

   If a NOTIFY arrives that has a version number that is incremented by
   more than one, the subscriber knows that a state delta has been
   missed; it ignores the NOTIFY message containing the state delta
   (except for the version number, which it retains to detect message
   loss), and re-sends a SUBSCRIBE to force a NOTIFY containing a
   complete state snapshot.

5.4.  Event Package Responsibilities

   Event packages are not required to reiterate any of the behavior
   described in this document, although they may choose to do so for
   clarity or emphasis.  In general, though, such packages are expected
   to describe only the behavior that extends or modifies the behavior
   described in this document.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 30]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Note that any behavior designated with "SHOULD" or "MUST" in this
   document is not allowed to be weakened by extension documents;
   however, such documents may elect to strengthen "SHOULD" requirements
   to "MUST" strength if required by their application.

      In addition to the normal sections expected in standards-track
      RFCs and SIP extension documents, authors of event packages need
      to address each of the issues detailed in the following
      subsections, whenever applicable.

5.4.1.  Event Package Name

   This section, which MUST be present, defines the token name to be
   used to designate the event package.  It MUST include the information
   which appears in the IANA registration of the token.  For information
   on registering such types, see Section 7.

5.4.2.  Event Package Parameters

   If parameters are to be used on the "Event" header field to modify
   the behavior of the event package, the syntax and semantics of such
   header fields MUST be clearly defined.

5.4.3.  SUBSCRIBE Bodies

   It is expected that most, but not all, event packages will define
   syntax and semantics for SUBSCRIBE method bodies; these bodies will
   typically modify, expand, filter, throttle, and/or set thresholds for
   the class of events being requested.  Designers of event packages are
   strongly encouraged to re-use existing MIME types for message bodies
   where practical.

   This mandatory section of an event package defines what type or types
   of event bodies are expected in SUBSCRIBE requests (or specify that
   no event bodies are expected).  It should point to detailed
   definitions of syntax and semantics for all referenced body types.

5.4.4.  Subscription Duration

   It is RECOMMENDED that event packages give a suggested range of times
   considered reasonable for the duration of a subscription.  Such
   packages MUST also define a default "Expires" value to be used if
   none is specified.

5.4.5.  NOTIFY Bodies

   The NOTIFY body is used to report state on the resource being
   monitored.  Each package MUST define what type or types of event



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 31]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   bodies are expected in NOTIFY requests.  Such packages MUST specify
   or cite detailed specifications for the syntax and semantics
   associated with such event body.

   Event packages also MUST define which MIME type is to be assumed if
   none are specified in the "Accept" header field of the SUBSCRIBE
   request.

5.4.6.  Notifier processing of SUBSCRIBE requests

   This section describes the processing to be performed by the notifier
   upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE request.  Such a section is required.

   Information in this section includes details of how to authenticate
   subscribers and authorization issues for the package.  Such
   authorization issues may include, for example, whether all SUBSCRIBE
   requests for this package are answered with 202 responses (see
   Section 6.2).

5.4.7.  Notifier generation of NOTIFY requests

   This section of an event package describes the process by which the
   notifier generates and sends a NOTIFY request.  This includes
   detailed information about what events cause a NOTIFY to be sent, how
   to compute the state information in the NOTIFY, how to generate
   neutral or fake state information to hide authorization delays and
   decisions from users, and whether state information is complete or
   deltas for notifications; see Section 5.3.  Such a section is
   required.

   This section may optionally describe the behavior used to process the
   subsequent response.

5.4.8.  Subscriber processing of NOTIFY requests

   This section of an event package describes the process followed by
   the subscriber upon receipt of a NOTIFY request, including any logic
   required to form a coherent resource state (if applicable).

5.4.9.  Handling of forked requests

   Each event package MUST specify whether forked SUBSCRIBE requests are
   allowed to install multiple subscriptions.

   If such behavior is not allowed, the first potential dialog-
   establishing message will create a dialog.  All subsequent NOTIFY
   messages which correspond to the SUBSCRIBE message (i.e., match "To",
   "From", "From" header field "tag" parameter, "Call-ID", "Event", and



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 32]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   "Event" header field "id" parameter) but which do not match the
   dialog would be rejected with a 481 response.  Note that the 200-
   class response to the SUBSCRIBE can arrive after a matching NOTIFY
   has been received; such responses might not correlate to the same
   dialog established by the NOTIFY.  Except as required to complete the
   SUBSCRIBE transaction, such non-matching 200-class responses are
   ignored.

   If installing of multiple subscriptions by way of a single forked
   SUBSCRIBE is allowed, the subscriber establishes a new dialog towards
   each notifier by returning a 200-class response to each NOTIFY.  Each
   dialog is then handled as its own entity, and is refreshed
   independent of the other dialogs.

   In the case that multiple subscriptions are allowed, the event
   package MUST specify whether merging of the notifications to form a
   single state is required, and how such merging is to be performed.
   Note that it is possible that some event packages may be defined in
   such a way that each dialog is tied to a mutually exclusive state
   which is unaffected by the other dialogs; this MUST be clearly stated
   if it is the case.

5.4.10.  Rate of notifications

   Each event package is expected to define a requirement (SHOULD or
   MUST strength) which defines an absolute maximum on the rate at which
   notifications are allowed to be generated by a single notifier.

   Each package MAY further define a throttle mechanism which allows
   subscribers to further limit the rate of notification.

5.4.11.  State Aggregation

   Many event packages inherently work by collecting information about a
   resource from a number of other sources -- either through the use of
   PUBLISH [RFC3903], by subscribing to state information, or through
   other state gathering mechanisms.

   Event packages that involve retrieval of state information for a
   single resource from more than one source need to consider how
   notifiers aggregate information into a single, coherent state.  Such
   packages MUST specify how notifiers aggregate information and how
   they provide authentication and authorization.

5.4.12.  Examples

   Event packages SHOULD include several demonstrative message flow
   diagrams paired with several typical, syntactically correct, and



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 33]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   complete messages.

   It is RECOMMENDED that documents describing event packages clearly
   indicate that such examples are informative and not normative, with
   instructions that implementors refer to the main text of the document
   for exact protocol details.

5.4.13.  Use of URIs to Retrieve State

   Some types of event packages may define state information which is
   potentially too large to reasonably send in a SIP message.  To
   alleviate this problem, event packages may include the ability to
   convey a URI instead of state information; this URI will then be used
   to retrieve the actual state information.

   [RFC4483] defines a mechanism that can be used by event packages to
   convey information in such a fashion.


6.  Security Considerations

6.1.  Access Control

   The ability to accept subscriptions should be under the direct
   control of the notifier's user, since many types of events may be
   considered sensitive for the purposes of privacy.  Similarly, the
   notifier should have the ability to selectively reject subscriptions
   based on the subscriber identity (based on access control lists),
   using standard SIP authentication mechanisms.  The methods for
   creation and distribution of such access control lists is outside the
   scope of this document.

6.2.  Notifier Privacy Mechanism

   The mere act of returning a 200 or certain 4xx and 6xx responses to
   SUBSCRIBE requests may, under certain circumstances, create privacy
   concerns by revealing sensitive policy information.  In these cases,
   the notifier SHOULD always return a 202 response.  While the
   subsequent NOTIFY message may not convey true state, it MUST appear
   to contain a potentially correct piece of data from the point of view
   of the subscriber, indistinguishable from a valid response.
   Information about whether a user is authorized to subscribe to the
   requested state is never conveyed back to the original user under
   these circumstances.

   Individual packages and their related documents for which such a mode
   of operation makes sense can further describe how and why to generate
   such potentially correct data.  For example, such a mode of operation



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 34]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   is mandated by [RFC2779] for user presence information.

6.3.  Denial-of-Service attacks

   The current model (one SUBSCRIBE request triggers a SUBSCRIBE
   response and one or more NOTIFY requests) is a classic setup for an
   amplifier node to be used in a smurf attack.

   Also, the creation of state upon receipt of a SUBSCRIBE request can
   be used by attackers to consume resources on a victim's machine,
   rendering it unusable.

   To reduce the chances of such an attack, implementations of notifiers
   SHOULD require authentication.  Authentication issues are discussed
   in SIP [RFC3261].

6.4.  Replay Attacks

   Replaying of either SUBSCRIBE or NOTIFY can have detrimental effects.

   In the case of SUBSCRIBE messages, attackers may be able to install
   any arbitrary subscription which it witnessed being installed at some
   point in the past.  Replaying of NOTIFY messages may be used to spoof
   old state information (although a good versioning mechanism in the
   body of the NOTIFY messages may help mitigate such an attack).  Note
   that the prohibition on sending NOTIFY messages to nodes which have
   not subscribed to an event also aids in mitigating the effects of
   such an attack.

   To prevent such attacks, implementations SHOULD require
   authentication with anti-replay protection.  Authentication issues
   are discussed in SIP [RFC3261].

6.5.  Man-in-the middle attacks

   Even with authentication, man-in-the-middle attacks using SUBSCRIBE
   may be used to install arbitrary subscriptions, hijack existing
   subscriptions, terminate outstanding subscriptions, or modify the
   resource to which a subscription is being made.  To prevent such
   attacks, implementations SHOULD provide integrity protection across
   "Contact", "Route", "Expires", "Event", and "To" header fields of
   SUBSCRIBE messages, at a minimum.  If SUBSCRIBE bodies are used to
   define further information about the state of the call, they SHOULD
   be included in the integrity protection scheme.

   Man-in-the-middle attacks may also attempt to use NOTIFY messages to
   spoof arbitrary state information and/or terminate outstanding
   subscriptions.  To prevent such attacks, implementations SHOULD



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 35]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   provide integrity protection across the "Call-ID", "CSeq", and
   "Subscription-State" header fields and the bodies of NOTIFY messages.

   Integrity protection of message header fields and bodies is discussed
   in SIP [RFC3261].

6.6.  Confidentiality

   The state information contained in a NOTIFY message has the potential
   to contain sensitive information.  Implementations MAY encrypt such
   information to ensure confidentiality.

   While less likely, it is also possible that the information contained
   in a SUBSCRIBE message contains information that users might not want
   to have revealed.  Implementations MAY encrypt such information to
   ensure confidentiality.

   To allow the remote party to hide information it considers sensitive,
   all implementations SHOULD be able to handle encrypted SUBSCRIBE and
   NOTIFY messages.

   The mechanisms for providing confidentiality are detailed in SIP
   [RFC3261].


7.  IANA Considerations

   (This section is not applicable until this document is published as
   an RFC.)

7.1.  Event Packages

   This document defines an event-type namespace which requires a
   central coordinating body.  The body chosen for this coordination is
   the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).

   There are two different types of event-types: normal event packages,
   and event template-packages; see Section 5.2.  To avoid confusion,
   template-package names and package names share the same namespace; in
   other words, an event template-package MUST NOT share a name with a
   package.

   Following the policies outlined in "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
   Considerations Section in RFCs" [RFC2434], normal event package
   identification tokens are allocated as First Come First Served, and
   event template-package identification tokens are allocated on a IETF
   Consensus basis.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 36]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Registrations with the IANA MUST include the token being registered
   and whether the token is a package or a template-package.  Further,
   packages MUST include contact information for the party responsible
   for the registration and/or a published document which describes the
   event package.  Event template-package token registrations MUST
   include a pointer to the published RFC which defines the event
   template-package.

   Registered tokens to designate packages and template-packages MUST
   NOT contain the character ".", which is used to separate template-
   packages from packages.

7.1.1.  Registration Information

   As this document specifies no package or template-package names, the
   initial IANA registration for event types will be empty.  The
   remainder of the text in this section gives an example of the type of
   information to be maintained by the IANA; it also demonstrates all
   five possible permutations of package type, contact, and reference.

   The table below lists the event packages and template-packages
   defined in "SIP-Specific Event Notification" [RFC xxxx].  Each name
   is designated as a package or a template-package under "Type".

   Package Name      Type         Contact      Reference
   ------------      ----         -------      ---------
   example1          package      [Roach]
   example2          package      [Roach]      [RFC xxxx]
   example3          package                   [RFC xxxx]
   example4          template     [Roach]      [RFC xxxx]
   example5          template                  [RFC xxxx]


   PEOPLE
   ------
   [Roach] Adam Roach <adam.roach@tekelec.com>

   REFERENCES
   ----------
   [RFC xxxx] A.B. Roach, "SIP-Specific Event Notification", RFC XXXX,
              Monthname 20XX










Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 37]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


7.1.2.  Registration Template

   To: ietf-sip-events@iana.org
   Subject: Registration of new SIP event package

   Package Name:

      (Package names must conform to the syntax described in
      Section 8.2.1.)

   Is this registration for a Template Package:

      (indicate yes or no)

   Published Specification(s):

      (Template packages require a published RFC.  Other packages may
      reference a specification when appropriate).

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

7.2.  Reason Codes

   This document further defines "reason" codes for use in the
   "Subscription-State" header field (see Section 4.1.3).

   Following the policies outlined in "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
   Considerations Section in RFCs" [RFC2434], new reason codes require a
   Standards Action.

   Registrations with the IANA include the reason code being registered
   and a reference to a published document which describes the event
   package.  Insertion of such values takes place as part of the RFC
   publication process or as the result of inter-SDO liaison activity.
   New reason codes must conform to the syntax of the ABNF "token"
   element defined in SIP [RFC3261].

   [RFC4660] defined a new reason code prior to the establishment of an
   IANA registry.  We include its reason code ("badfilter") in the
   initial list of reason codes to ensure a complete registry.

   The IANA registry for reason code will be initialized with the
   following values:








Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 38]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Reason Code            Reference
   -----------            ---------
   deactivated            [RFC xxxx]
   probation              [RFC xxxx]
   rejected               [RFC xxxx]
   timeout                [RFC xxxx]
   giveup                 [RFC xxxx]
   noresource             [RFC xxxx]
   invariant              [RFC xxxx]
   badfilter              [RFC 4660]

   REFERENCES
   ----------
   [RFC xxxx] A.B. Roach, "SIP-Specific Event Notification", RFC XXXX,
              Monthname 20XX

   [RFC 4660] Khartabil, H., Leppanen, E., Lonnfors, M., and
              J. Costa-Requena, "Functional Description of Event
              Notification Filtering", September 2006.

7.3.  Header Field Names

   This document registers three new header field names, described
   elsewhere in this document.  These header fields are defined by the
   following information, which is to be added to the header field sub-
   registry under http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters.

   Header Name:   Allow-Events
   Compact Form:  u

   Header Name:   Subscription-State
   Compact Form:  (none)

   Header Name:   Event
   Compact Form:  o

7.4.  Response Codes

   This document registers two new response codes.  These response codes
   are defined by the following information, which is to be added to the
   method and response-code sub-registry under
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters.

   Response Code Number:   202
   Default Reason Phrase:  Accepted

   Response Code Number:   489
   Default Reason Phrase:  Bad Event



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 39]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


8.  Syntax

   This section describes the syntax extensions required for event
   notification in SIP.  Semantics are described in Section 4.  Note
   that the formal syntax definitions described in this document are
   expressed in the ABNF format used in SIP [RFC3261], and contain
   references to elements defined therein.

8.1.  New Methods

   This document describes two new SIP methods: SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY.

   This table expands on tables 2 and 3 in SIP [RFC3261].

   Header                    Where    SUB NOT
   ------                    -----    --- ---
   Accept                      R       o   o
   Accept                     2xx      -   -
   Accept                     415      o   o
   Accept-Encoding             R       o   o
   Accept-Encoding            2xx      -   -
   Accept-Encoding            415      o   o
   Accept-Language             R       o   o
   Accept-Language            2xx      -   -
   Accept-Language            415      o   o
   Alert-Info                  R       -   -
   Alert-Info                 180      -   -
   Allow                       R       o   o
   Allow                      2xx      o   o
   Allow                       r       o   o
   Allow                      405      m   m
   Authentication-Info        2xx      o   o
   Authorization               R       o   o
   Call-ID                     c       m   m
   Call-Info                   R       o   o
   Contact                     R       m   m
   Contact                    1xx      o   o
   Contact                    2xx      m   o
   Contact                    3xx      m   m
   Contact                    485      o   o
   Content-Disposition                 o   o
   Content-Encoding                    o   o
   Content-Language                    o   o
   Content-Length                      t   t
   Content-Type                        *   *
   CSeq                        c       m   m
   Date                                o   o
   Error-Info               300-699    o   o



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 40]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Expires                             o   -
   Expires                    2xx      m   -
   From                        c       m   m
   In-Reply-To                 R       -   -
   Max-Forwards                R       m   m
   Min-Expires                423      m   -
   MIME-Version                        o   o
   Organization                        o   -
   Priority                    R       o   -
   Proxy-Authenticate         407      m   m
   Proxy-Authorization         R       o   o
   Proxy-Require               R       o   o
   RAck                        R       -   -
   Record-Route                R       o   o
   Record-Route           2xx,401,484  o   o
   Reply-To                            -   -
   Require                             o   o
   Retry-After        404,413,480,486  o   o
   Retry-After              500,503    o   o
   Retry-After              600,603    o   o
   Route                       R       c   c
   RSeq                       1xx      o   o
   Server                      r       o   o
   Subject                     R       -   -
   Supported                   R       o   o
   Supported                  2xx      o   o
   Timestamp                           o   o
   To                         c(1)     m   m
   Unsupported                420      o   o
   User-Agent                          o   o
   Via                         c       m   m
   Warning                     R       -   o
   Warning                     r       o   o
   WWW-Authenticate           401      m   m

8.1.1.  SUBSCRIBE method

   "SUBSCRIBE" is added to the definition of the element "Method" in the
   SIP message grammar.

   Like all SIP method names, the SUBSCRIBE method name is case
   sensitive.  The SUBSCRIBE method is used to request asynchronous
   notification of an event or set of events at a later time.

8.1.2.  NOTIFY method

   "NOTIFY" is added to the definition of the element "Method" in the
   SIP message grammar.



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 41]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   The NOTIFY method is used to notify a SIP node that an event which
   has been requested by an earlier SUBSCRIBE method has occurred.  It
   may also provide further details about the event.

8.2.  New Header Fields

   This table expands on tables 2 and 3 in SIP [RFC3261], as amended by
   the changes described in Section 8.1.

   Header field      where proxy ACK BYE CAN INV OPT REG PRA SUB NOT
   -----------------------------------------------------------------
   Allow-Events        R          o   o   -   o   o   o   o   o   o
   Allow-Events       2xx         -   o   -   o   o   o   o   o   o
   Allow-Events       489         -   -   -   -   -   -   -   m   m
   Event               R          -   -   -   -   -   -   -   m   m
   Subscription-State  R          -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   m


8.2.1.  "Event" Header Field

   Event is added to the definition of the element "message-header
   field" in the SIP message grammar.

   For the purposes of matching NOTIFY messages with SUBSCRIBE messages,
   the event-type portion of the "Event" header field is compared byte-
   by-byte, and the "id" parameter token (if present) is compared byte-
   by-byte.  An "Event" header field containing an "id" parameter never
   matches an "Event" header field without an "id" parameter.  No other
   parameters are considered when performing a comparison.  SUBSCRIBE
   responses are matched per the transaction handling rules in SIP
   [RFC3261].

      Note that the forgoing text means that "Event: foo; id=1234" would
      match "Event: foo; param=abcd; id=1234", but not "Event: foo" (id
      does not match) or "Event: Foo; id=1234" (event portion does not
      match).

   This document does not define values for event-types.  These values
   will be defined by individual event packages, and MUST be registered
   with the IANA.

   There MUST be exactly one event type listed per event header field.
   Multiple events per message are disallowed.

8.2.2.  "Allow-Events" Header Field

   Allow-Events is added to the definition of the element "general-
   header field" in the SIP message grammar.  Its usage is described in



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 42]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   Section 4.4.4.

8.2.3.  "Subscription-State" Header Field

   Subscription-State is added to the definition of the element
   "request-header field" in the SIP message grammar.  Its usage is
   described in Section 4.1.3.

8.3.  New Response Codes

8.3.1.  "202 Accepted" Response Code

   The 202 response is added to the "Success" header field definition.
   "202 Accepted" has the same meaning as that defined in HTTP/1.1
   [RFC2616].

8.3.2.  "489 Bad Event" Response Code

   The 489 event response is added to the "Client-Error" header field
   field definition. "489 Bad Event" is used to indicate that the server
   did not understand the event package specified in a "Event" header
   field.

8.4.  Augmented BNF Definitions

   The Augmented BNF definitions for the various new and modified syntax
   elements follows.  The notation is as used in SIP [RFC3261], and any
   elements not defined in this section are as defined in SIP and the
   documents to which it refers.






















Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 43]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   SUBSCRIBEm        = %x53.55.42.53.43.52.49.42.45 ; SUBSCRIBE in caps
   NOTIFYm           = %x4E.4F.54.49.46.59 ; NOTIFY in caps
   extension-method = SUBSCRIBEm / NOTIFYm / token

   Event             =  ( "Event" / "o" ) HCOLON event-type
                        *( SEMI event-param )
   event-type        =  event-package *( "." event-template )
   event-package     =  token-nodot
   event-template    =  token-nodot
   token-nodot       =  1*( alphanum / "-"  / "!" / "%" / "*"
                            / "_" / "+" / "`" / "'" / "~" )

   ; The use of the "id" parameter is deprecated; it is included
   ; for backwards compatibility purposes only.
   event-param      =  generic-param / ( "id" EQUAL token )

   Allow-Events =  ( "Allow-Events" / "u" ) HCOLON event-type
                   *(COMMA event-type)

   Subscription-State   = "Subscription-State" HCOLON substate-value
                          *( SEMI subexp-params )
   substate-value       = "active" / "pending" / "terminated"
                          / extension-substate
   extension-substate   = token
   subexp-params        =   ("reason" EQUAL event-reason-value)
                          / ("expires" EQUAL delta-seconds)
                          / ("retry-after" EQUAL delta-seconds)
                          / generic-param
   event-reason-value   =   "deactivated"
                          / "probation"
                          / "rejected"
                          / "timeout"
                          / "giveup"
                          / "noresource"
                          / "invariant"
                          / event-reason-extension
   event-reason-extension = token


9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC2434]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 44]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


              October 1998.

   [RFC2616]  Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
              Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
              Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.

   [RFC2779]  Day, M., Aggarwal, S., Mohr, G., and J. Vincent, "Instant
              Messaging / Presence Protocol Requirements", RFC 2779,
              February 2000.

   [RFC2848]  Petrack, S. and L. Conroy, "The PINT Service Protocol:
              Extensions to SIP and SDP for IP Access to Telephone Call
              Services", RFC 2848, June 2000.

   [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.

   [RFC3265]  Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific
              Event Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002.

   [RFC4483]  Burger, E., "A Mechanism for Content Indirection in
              Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Messages", RFC 4483,
              May 2006.

   [I-D.ietf-sip-gruu]
              Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User
              Agent (UA) URIs (GRUU) in the  Session Initiation Protocol
              (SIP)", draft-ietf-sip-gruu-15 (work in progress),
              October 2007.

9.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3515]  Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer
              Method", RFC 3515, April 2003.

   [RFC3840]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and P. Kyzivat,
              "Indicating User Agent Capabilities in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3840, August 2004.

   [RFC3891]  Mahy, R., Biggs, B., and R. Dean, "The Session Initiation
              Protocol (SIP) "Replaces" Header", RFC 3891,
              September 2004.

   [RFC3903]  Niemi, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
              for Event State Publication", RFC 3903, October 2004.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 45]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   [RFC3911]  Mahy, R. and D. Petrie, "The Session Initiation Protocol
              (SIP) "Join" Header", RFC 3911, October 2004.

   [RFC4235]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and R. Mahy, "An INVITE-
              Initiated Dialog Event Package for the Session Initiation
              Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4235, November 2005.

   [RFC4485]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Guidelines for Authors
              of Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
              RFC 4485, May 2006.

   [RFC4528]  Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
              (LDAP) Assertion Control", RFC 4528, June 2006.

   [RFC4660]  Khartabil, H., Leppanen, E., Lonnfors, M., and J. Costa-
              Requena, "Functional Description of Event Notification
              Filtering", RFC 4660, September 2006.

   [RFC5057]  Sparks, R., "Multiple Dialog Usages in the Session
              Initiation Protocol", RFC 5057, November 2007.


Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to the participants in the Events BOF at the 48th IETF meeting
   in Pittsburgh, as well as those who gave ideas and suggestions on the
   SIP Events mailing list.  In particular, I wish to thank Henning
   Schulzrinne of Columbia University for coming up with the final
   three-tiered event identification scheme, Sean Olson for
   miscellaneous guidance, Jonathan Rosenberg for a thorough scrubbing
   of the -00 draft, and the authors of the "SIP Extensions for
   Presence" document for their input to SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY request
   semantics.

   I also owe a debt of gratitude to all the implementors who have
   provided feedback on areas of confusion or difficulty in the original
   specification.  In particular, Robert Sparks' Herculean efforts
   organizing, running, and collecting data from the SIPit events have
   proven invaluable in shaking out specification bugs.  Robert Sparks
   is also responsible for untangling the dialog usage mess, in the form
   of RFC 5057.


Appendix B.  Open Issues







Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 46]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


B.1.  Bug 711: Allow-Events can't express template support

   OPEN ISSUE: There are several things we can do here.  I have not
   proposed on in particular; I would prefer to solicit initial feedback
   from implementors regarding what has been developed and deployed so
   far.

   The key problem is that support of template event packages can't be
   expressed in a complete yet bounded fashion.  It would not be
   reasonable, for example, to require notifiers that support winfo on
   arbitrary packages to include an "Allow-Events" header field with
   contents like "presence, presence.winfo, presence.winfo.winfo,
   presence.winfo.winfo.winfo, presence.winfo.winfo.winfo.winfo,
   presence.winfo.winfo.winfo.winfo.winfo...."

   One alternative would be to list event packages and template event
   packages, without explicitly indicating which templates can be
   applied to which other packages.  In such a case, the preceding
   example would be collapsed to "Allow-Events: presence, winfo".  The
   notifier may have local policy that limits how they can be combined
   -- but we have plenty of other places where protocol allows
   something, but policy forbids it.

B.2.  Remove 202 Response Code?

   In practice, the 202 response code defined in RFC 3265 has proven to
   be nearly useless, due to its redundancy with the "pending" state,
   and its interaction with the HERFP problem.  Given that 202 must be
   treated as 200 if an implementation does not understand it: would
   removing the 202 response code cause any issues for current
   implementations?

B.3.  Timer N and Resubscribes

   Section 4.1.2.4 defines a new Timer N that is used upon initial
   subscription to bound the amount of time that a subscriber needs to
   wait for a NOTIFY.  Should this also apply to resubscribes?  On one
   hand, the mechanism is not as necessary, since the subscriber already
   has a negotiated expiration time associated with the subscription.
   On the other hand, if no NOTIFY arrives in 64*T1, it is highly likely
   that the notifier has gone off the rails, which means that the
   subscriber can safely clean up state associated with that
   subscription.  The key question involved in applying Timer N to
   resubscriptions is whether doing so makes subscriptions unnecessarily
   brittle.






Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 47]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


Appendix C.  Changes

   This section, and all of its subsections, will be consolidated into a
   single "Changes Since RFC 3265" section prior to publication.  Bug
   numbers refer to the identifiers for the bug reports kept on file at
   http://bugs.sipit.net/.

C.1.  Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00 to
      draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-01

   o  Renamed Timer L to Timer N, to avoid a naming conflict.
   o  Added clarification about proper response when the SUBSCRIBE
      indicates an unkonwn MIME type in its Accept header field.
   o  Clarification around Route and Record-Route behavior.
   o  Added non-normative warning about the limitations of state
      polling.
   o  Added information about targeting subscriptions at specific
      dialogs.
   o  Added "Call-Info" header field to RFC 3261 Table 2 expansion.

C.2.  Changes from draft-roach-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00 to
      draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00

   None

C.3.  Changes since RFC 3265

C.3.1.  Bug 666: Clarify use of expires=xxx with terminated

   Strengthened language in Section 4.1.3 to clarify that expires should
   not be sent with terminated, and must be ignored if received.

C.3.2.  Bug 667: Reason code for unsub/poll not clearly spelled out

   Clarified description of "timeout" in Section 4.1.3. (n.b., the text
   in Section 4.4.3 is actually pretty clear about this).

C.3.3.  Bug 669: Clarify: SUBSCRIBE for a duration might be answered
        with a NOTIFY/expires=0

   Added clarifying text to Section 4.2.2 explaining that shortening a
   subscription to zero seconds is valid.  Also added sentence to
   Section 3.1.1 explicitly allowing shortening to zero.

C.3.4.  Bug 670: Dialog State Machine needs clarification

   The issues associated with the bug deal exclusively with the handling
   of multiple usages with a dialog.  This behavior has been deprecated



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 48]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   and moved to Section 4.5.2.  This section, in turn, cites [RFC5057],
   which addresses all of the issues in Bug 670.

C.3.5.  Bug 671: Clarify timeout-based removal of subscriptions

   Changed Section 4.2.2 to specifically cite Timer F (so as to avoid
   ambiguity between transaction timeouts and retransmission timeouts).

C.3.6.  Bug 672: Mandate expires= in NOTIFY

   Changed strength of including of "expires" in a NOTIFY from SHOULD to
   MUST in Section 4.2.2.

C.3.7.  Bug 673: INVITE 481 response effect clarification

   This bug was addressed in [RFC5057].

C.3.8.  Bug 677: SUBSCRIBE response matching text in error

   Fixed Section 8.2.1 to remove incorrect "...responses and..." --
   explicitly pointed to SIP for transaction response handling.

C.3.9.  Bug 695: Document is not explicit about response to NOTIFY at
        subscription termination

   Added text to Section 4.4.1 indicating that the typical response to a
   terminal NOTIFY is a "200 OK".

C.3.10.  Bug 696: Subscription state machine needs clarification

   Added state machine diagram to Section 4.1.2 with explicit handling
   of what to do when a SUBSCRIBE never shows up.  Added definition of
   and handling for new Timer N to Section 4.1.2.4.  Added state machine
   to Section 4.2.2 to reinforce text.

C.3.11.  Bug 697: Unsubscription behavior could be clarified

   Added text to Section 4.2.1.4 encouraging (but not requiring) full
   state in final NOTIFY message.  Also added text to Section 4.1.2.3
   warning subscribers that full state may or may not be present in the
   final NOTIFY.

C.3.12.  Bug 699: NOTIFY and SUBSCRIBE are target refresh requests

   Added text to both Section 3.1 and Section 3.2 explicitly indicating
   that SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY are target refresh methods.





Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 49]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


C.3.13.  Bug 722: Inconsistent 423 reason phrase text

   Changed reason code to "Interval Too Brief" in Section 4.2.1.1 and
   Section 4.2.1.4, to match 423 reason code in SIP [RFC3261].

C.3.14.  Bug 741: guidance needed on when to not include Allow-Events

   Added non-normative clarification to Section 4.4.4 regarding
   inclusion of Allow-Events in a NOTIFY for the one-and-only package
   supported by the notifier.

C.3.15.  Bug 744: 5xx to NOTIFY terminates a subscription, but should
         not

   Issue of subscription (usage) termination versus dialog termination
   is handled in [RFC5057].  The text in Section 4.2.2 has been updated
   to summarize the behavior described by 5057, and cites it for
   additional detail and rationale.

C.3.16.  Bug 752: Detection of forked requests is incorrect

   Removed erroneous "CSeq" from list of matching criteria in
   Section 5.4.9.

C.3.17.  Bug 773: Reason code needs IANA registry

   Added Section 7.2 to create and populate IANA registry.

C.3.18.  Bug 774: Need new reason for terminating subscriptions to
         resources that never change

   Added new "invariant" reason code to Section 4.1.3, ABNF syntax.

C.3.19.  Clarify handling of Route/Record-Route in NOTIFY

   Changed text in Section 4.3 mandating Record-Route in initial
   SUBSCRIBE and all NOTIFY messages, and adding "MAY" level statements
   for subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages.

C.3.20.  Eliminate implicit subscriptions

   Added text to Section 4.2.1 explaining some of the problems
   associated with implicit subscriptions, normative language
   prohibiting them.  Removed language from Section 3.2 describing "non-
   SUBSCRIBE" mechanisms for creating subscriptions.  Simplified
   language in Section 4.2.2, now that the soft-state/non-soft-state
   distinction is unnecessary.




Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 50]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


C.3.21.  Deprecate dialog re-use

   Moved handling of dialog re-use and "id" handling to Section 4.5.2.
   It is documented only for backwards-compatibility purposes.

C.3.22.  Rationalize dialog creation

   Section 4.4.1 has been updated to specify that dialogs should be
   created when the NOTIFY arrives.  Previously, the dialog was
   established by the SUBSCRIBE 200, or by the NOTIFY transaction.  This
   was unnecessarily complicated; the newer rules are easier to
   implement (and result in effectively the same behavior on the wire).

C.3.23.  Refactor behavior sections

   Reorganized Section 4 to consolidate behavior along role lines
   (subscriber/notifier/proxy) instead of method lines.

C.3.24.  Clarify sections that need to be present in event packages

   Added sentence to Section 5 clarifying that event packages are
   expected to include explicit sections covering the issues discussed
   in this section.

C.3.25.  Make CANCEL handling more explicit

   Text in Section 4.6 now clearly calls out behavior upon receipt of a
   CANCEL.  We also echo the "...SHOULD NOT send..." requirement from
   [RFC3261].

C.3.26.  Remove State Agent Terminology

   As originally planned, we anticipated a fairly large number of event
   packages that would move back and forth between end-user devices and
   servers in the network.  In practice, this has ended up not being the
   case.  Certain events, like dialog state, are inherently hosted at
   end-user devices; others, like presence, are almost always hosted in
   the network (due to issues like composition, and the ability to
   deliver information when user devices are offline).  Further, the
   concept of State Agents is the most misunderstood by event package
   authors.  In my expert review of event packages, I have yet to find
   one that got the concept of State Agents completely correct -- and
   most of them start out with the concept being 100% backwards from the
   way RFC 3265 described it.

   Rather than remove the ability to perform the actions previously
   attributed to the widely misunderstood term "State Agent," we have
   simply eliminated this term.  Instead, we talk about the behaviors



Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 51]

Internet-Draft       SIP-Specific Event Notification       February 2010


   required to create state agents (state aggregation, subscription
   notification) without defining a formal term to describe the servers
   that exhibit these behaviors.  In effect, this is an editorial change
   to make life easier for event package authors; the actual protocol
   does not change as a result.

   The definition of "State Agent" has been removed from Section 2.
   Section 4.4.2 has been retooled to discuss migration of subscription
   in general, without calling out the specific example of state agents.
   Section 5.4.11 has been focused on state aggregation in particular,
   instead of state aggregation as an aspect of state agents.


Author's Address

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

   Email: adam@nostrum.com




























Roach                    Expires August 23, 2010               [Page 52]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/