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

Versions: (draft-levin-sipping-conferencing-requirements) 00 01 RFC 4245

SIPPING Working Group                                           O. Levin
Internet-Draft                                     Microsoft Corporation
Expires: March 2, 2005                                           R. Even
                                                                 Polycom
                                                          September 2004


     High Level Requirements for  Tightly Coupled SIP Conferencing
            draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-requirements-01

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions
   of section 3 of RFC 3667.  By submitting this Internet-Draft, each
   author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of
   which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of
   which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
   RFC 3668.

   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 March 2, 2005.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).

Abstract

   This document examines a wide range of conferencing requirements for
   tightly coupled SIP conferences.  Separate documents will map the
   requirements to existing protocol primitives, define new protocol
   extensions, and introduce new protocols as needed.  Together, these
   documents will provide a guide for building interoperable SIP
   conferencing applications.



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


Table of Contents

   1.  Scope  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  An Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  High Level Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1   Discovery Phase  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.2   Conference Creation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.3   Conference Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.4   Participants' Manipulations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       3.4.1   Participation of a Conference-unaware User Agent . . .  5
       3.4.2   Dial-Out Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       3.4.3   Dial-In Scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.4.4   Third Party Invitation to a Conference . . . . . . . .  6
       3.4.5   Participants' Removal  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.4.6   Participants' Privacy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.5   Conference State Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.5.1   Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.5.2   Dissemination of Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       3.5.3   On-demand Information Dissemination  . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.6   Focus Role Migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     3.7   Side-bar Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     3.8   Cascading of Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     3.9   SIMPLE and SIP Conferencing Coordination . . . . . . . . . 10
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   5.  Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.1   Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.2   Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 12





















Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


1.  Scope

   This document examines a wide range of conferencing requirements for
   tightly coupled SIP (RFC 3261 [2]) conferencing.

   The requirements are grouped by subjects in various areas allowing
   solutions to progress in parallel.

   Separate documents will map the requirements to existing protocol
   primitives, define new protocol extensions, and introduce new
   protocols as needed.

   Together, these documents will provide a guide for building
   interoperable SIP conferencing applications.

2.  An Overview

   A SIP conference is an association of SIP user agents (i.e.
   conference participants) with a central point (i.e.  a conference
   focus) where the focus has direct peer-wise relationships with the
   participants by maintaining a separate SIP dialog with each.

   The focus is a SIP user agent which has abilities to host SIP
   conferences including their creation, maintenance, and manipulation
   using SIP call control means and potentially other non-SIP means.

   In this tightly coupled model, the SIP conference graph is always a
   star.  The conference focus maintains the correlation among
   conference's dialogs internally.

   The conference focus can be implemented either by a participant or by
   a separate application server.

   In the first case, a focus is typically capable of hosting a simple
   ad-hoc conference only.  We envision that such basic conference can
   be established using SIP call control primitives only.

   A dedicated conference server, in addition to the basic features,
   offers richer functionality including simultaneous conferences, large
   scalable conferences, reserved conferences, and managed conferences.
   A conferencing server can support any subset of the advanced
   conferencing functions presented in this document.

   The media graph of a SIP conference can be centralized,
   de-centralized, or any combination of both and potentially differ per
   media type.  In centralized case, the media sessions are established
   between the focus and each one of the participants.  In
   de-centralized (i.e.  distributed) case, the media graph is a



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   (multicast or multi-unicast) mesh among the participants.
   Consequently, the media processing (e.g.  mixing) can be performed
   either by the focus alone or by the participants.

   Conference participants and third parties can have different roles
   and privileges in a certain conference.  For example, conferencing
   policy can state that the rights to disconnect from and to invite to
   a conference are limited to the conference chair only.

   Throughout the document, by conference policies we mean a set of
   parameters and rules (e.g.  maximum number of participants, needs
   chair-person supervision or not, password protected or not, duration,
   a way of media mixing, etc.) that are defined at the onset of a
   conference.  Typically, conference policies would be specified by a
   conference creator and need special privileges to be manipulated.

   Throughout the document, by a conference state we mean a set of
   information describing the conference in progress.  This includes
   participants' information (such as dialog identifiers), media
   sessions in progress, the current loudest speaker, the current chair,
   etc.

3.  High Level Requirements

   In addition to the requirements presented in this document,
   supplementary requirements for conferencing policy, media mixing and
   other manipulations, floor control, privileges control, etc.  will be
   discussed in separate documents.

3.1  Discovery Phase

   Some of the requirements presented in this section can be met either
   by configuration means or by using proprietary conventions.
   Nevertheless, we feel that standard means for implementing these
   functions by automata MUST be defined.

   REQ-1: Discovery of a location of an arbitrary SIP conferencing
   server(s).

   REQ-2: Given a SIP AOR of a certain entity, resolution whether the
   SIP entity has focus capabilities.

   REQ-3: Given a global identifier of a particular conference, locating
   the conference focus.

   REQ-4: Given a global identifier of a particular conference,
   obtaining the conference properties.




Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   REQ-5: Given a global identifier of a particular conference,
   obtaining the conference state information.

3.2  Conference Creation

   Given a focus location, a means MUST be defined for an interested
   entity (including a user agent) to implement the procedures below:

   REQ-1: Creation of an ad-hoc conference identifier and the conference
   with specified properties.

   REQ-2: Creation of a reserved conference identifier for a conference
   with specified properties.

   REQ-3:  Specifying properties upon conference creation in any of the
   following ways: default, profiles and explicitly.

3.3  Conference Termination

   REQ-1: Given a conference identifier, a means MUST be defined for a
   user agent to disconnect all participants from the conference and
   terminate the conference including the release of the associated
   resources.

   REQ-2: A means MAY be defined for requesting a focus to revert a
   two-party conference to a basic SIP point-to-point session including
   the release of the associated conferencing resources.

3.4  Participants' Manipulations

   Some of the requirements presented in this section can be met by
   human intervention, configuration means, or by using proprietary
   conventions.  Nevertheless, we feel that standard means for
   implementing these functions by automata MUST be defined.

3.4.1  Participation of a Conference-unaware User Agent

   REQ-1: Focus MUST be able to invite and disconnect an RFC 3261
   compliant only SIP user agent to and from a SIP conference.

   REQ-2: An RFC 3261 compliant only SIP user agent MUST be able to
   dial-in to a particular SIP conference.  In this case, only the human
   knows that he/she is connected to the conference.

3.4.2  Dial-Out Scenarios

   REQ-1: A means MUST be defined for a focus to invite another user
   agent to one of the focus' conferences.  This procedure MUST result



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   in the establishment of a single SIP dialog between the two.

   REQ-2: Given an existing SIP dialog between two user agents, if at
   least one User agent has focus capabilities, a means MUST be defined
   for the conference focus to invite the other user agent to one of the
   focus' conferences without additional SIP dialog establishment.

   REQ-3: An invitation to a user agent to join a conference MUST
   include a standard indication that it is a conference and the
   conference identifier.

3.4.3  Dial-In Scenarios

   REQ-1: A means MUST be defined for a user agent to create an ad-hoc
   conference with default properties (as per "Conference Creation"
   REQ-1 above) and to become a participant using a single SIP dialog.

   REQ-2: Given a reserved conference identifier, a means MUST be
   defined for a user agent to activate the conference and to become a
   participant using a single SIP dialog.

   REQ-3: Given a conference identifier of an active conference, a means
   MUST be defined for a user agent to dial-in the conference and to
   become a participant using a single SIP dialog between the two.

   REQ-4: Given an identifier of one of the dialogs of a particular
   active conference, a means MUST be defined for a user agent to
   dial-in the conference and to become a participant.

3.4.4  Third Party Invitation to a Conference

   REQ-1: Given a conference identifier, a means MUST be defined for a
   user agent to invite another user agent to this conference.

   REQ-2: Given an identifier of one of the dialogs of a particular
   active conference, a means MUST be defined for a user agent to invite
   another user agent to this conference.

   REQ-3: Given a conference identifier, a means SHOULD be defined for a
   user agent to invite a list of user agents to this conference (a
   so-called "mass invitation").

3.4.5  Participants' Removal

   REQ-1: A means MUST be defined for a conference focus to remove a
   conference participant from the conference.

   REQ-2: Given a conference identifier, a means MUST be defined for a



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   user agent to remove a participant from the conference.

   REQ-3: Given an identifier of one of the dialogs of a particular
   active conference, a means MUST be defined for a user agent to remove
   a participant from the conference.

   REQ-4: Given a conference identifier, a means MUST be defined for a
   user agent to remove all the participants from the conference.

   REQ-5: Given a conference identifier and a sub-list of participants,
   a means MAY be defined for a user agent to remove the specified
   participants from the conference (a so-called "mass ejection").

3.4.6  Participants' Privacy

   A conference focus SHOULD support the procedures described in this
   section.  A conference participant MAY support the procedures
   described in this section.  The requirements imply that "anonymizing"
   operations MUST be performed on all: the call control, the media
   control and the media content when appropriate.

   REQ-1: A conference participant joins the conference "anonymously",
   i.e.  his/her presence can be announced but without disclosing
   his/her identity.

   REQ-2: A conference participant requests a focus for anonymous
   participation in the conference.

   REQ-3: A conference participant joins a conference in a "hidden
   mode", i.e.  his/her both presence and identity are not to be
   disclosed to other participants.

   REQ-4: A conference participant requests a focus for participation in
   the conference in a hidden mode.

3.5  Conference State Information

3.5.1  Description

   By a conference state we mean a virtual database describing the
   conference in progress.  This includes different conference aspects -
   participants' information (such as dialog identifiers and state),
   media sessions in progress (such as current stream contributing
   sources and encoding schemes), the current loudest speaker, the
   current chair, etc.  Conference state is the latest conference
   snapshot triggered by changes in participants' state, conference
   policy changes, etc.




Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 7]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   REQ-1: A conference state virtual database MUST have a modular
   definition, i.e.  it MUST be possible to access different conference
   aspects independently.

   REQ-2: It MUST be possible to aggregate information relating to
   different conference aspects in a single report.

   REQ-3: A mechanism for extensible definition and registration of
   conference state evolving aspects MUST be present.

   REQ-4: A default conference state report MUST be defined.  It SHOULD
   contain A minimal useful set of information (e.g.  a list of current
   conference participants).

3.5.2  Dissemination of Changes

   REQ-1: A means MUST be defined for reporting the conference state
   changes to interested parties (including non-conference participants)
   in a timely manner.

   REQ-2: A means MUST be defined for a SIP user agent to express its
   interest in selected state changes only.

   REQ-3: A means MUST be defined for a SIP user agent to express the
   minimum interval between receiving state change reports.

   REQ-4: It MUST be possible to aggregate recent changes in a single
   reporting event.

   REQ-5: Default conference state change reports MUST be defined.  They
   SHOULD contain minimal useful to the participants information (e.g.
   participants' joining and leaving the conference).

3.5.3  On-demand Information Dissemination

   REQ-1: A means MUST be defined to disseminate any conference state
   information to interested parties (including SIP user agents)
   on-demand.

   REQ-2: A means MUST be defined for an interested party (including a
   SIP user agent) to request conference state information of a
   particular conference defined by the conference identifier.

   REQ-3: A means MUST be defined for an interested party (including a
   SIP user agent) to specify the subset of the conference state
   information it wants and capable to receive.





Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 8]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


3.6  Focus Role Migration

   REQ-1: A procedure for delegating a focus role by the current focus
   to another participant MUST be defined.

   REQ-2: A procedure for requesting a conference focus to transfer its
   role to another participant MUST be defined.

   REQ-3: A procedure for on-demand unconditional transfer of the focus
   role to a different participant MUST be defined.

   REQ-4: A detection procedure for a focus failure condition MUST be
   defined.

3.7  Side-bar Conferences

   A standard means MUST be defined in order to implement the operations
   defined in this section below.

   REQ-1: A user agent (not a conference participant) joins a side-bar
   within the conference by SIP means.

   REQ-2: A user agent (not a conference participant) is invited to a
   side-bar within the conference by SIP means.

   REQ-3: A conference participant creates a side-bar conference with
   one or more participants in a conference by SIP means.

   REQ-4: A conference participant joins a side-bar within the
   conference by SIP means.

   REQ-5: A conference participant is invited to a side-bar within the
   conference by SIP means.

   REQ-6: A conference-unaware user agent (a participant or not) creates
   and participates in side-bar conferences.  It MAY be achieved by
   non-SIP means.

   REQ-7: A conference participant creates side-bar conferences within
   the conference without establishing any additional SIP dialogs with
   the focus.  It MAY be achieved by non-SIP means.

   REQ-8: A conference participant joins any number of side-bars within
   the conference without establishing any additional SIP dialogs with
   the focus.  It MAY be achieved by non-SIP means.

   REQ-9: A conference participant is invited to any number of side-bars
   within the conference without establishing any additional SIP dialogs



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                  [Page 9]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   with the focus.  It MAY be achieved by non-SIP means.

3.8  Cascading of Conferences

   "Cascading of Conferences" is a term that has different meanings in
   different contexts.  Some examples are listed below:

      -    Peer-to-peer chaining of signaling. (Many ways exist to
           build the media graph in this case.)

      -    Conferences have hierarchal signaling relations. (Many
           ways exists to build the media graph in this case.)

      -    "Cascading" is used to distribute the media "mixing"
           only. The distribution of signaling is not required.

   As it can be seen from the examples, each will define a different set
   of requirements.

3.9  SIMPLE and SIP Conferencing Coordination

   REQ-1: SIMPLE-based Presence and Instant Messaging architecture
   SHOULD fit into the general SIP Conferencing architecture.

   REQ-2: A scenario where a multimedia SIP conference and a multiparty
   IM conversation take place among the same group of participants MUST
   be addressed.

   REQ-3: A scenario where a side-bar or/and a sub-IM-conference is
   being held as a part of SIP conference MUST be addressed.

4.  Security Considerations

   This document discusses high level requirements for SIP conferencing.
   Conferencing has some specific security requirements which will be
   summarized here at a very high level.

   All of the operations and functions described in this document need
   to be authorized by a focus or a participant.  It is expected that
   conferences will be governed by a set of authorization rules defined
   as a part of the conference policy.  In order for the conference
   policy to be implemented, the focus needs to be able to authenticate
   potential participants.  Normal SIP mechanisms including Digest
   authentication and certificates can be used.  These conference
   specific security requirements will be discussed in detail in the
   protocol documents.

   Conferencing also has privacy implications.  Some of these are



Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                 [Page 10]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


   discussed in this document.  Standard SIP mechanisms for a user agent
   to request privacy should be utilized by a focus and will be detailed
   in the protocol documents.

5.  Contributors

   This work is based on the discussions among the members of the SIP
   Conferencing design team.

6.  References

6.1  Normative References

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

   [2]  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.

6.2  Informative References


Authors' Addresses

   Orit Levin
   Microsoft Corporation
   One Microsoft Way
   Redmond, WA  98052

   EMail: oritl@microsoft.com


   Roni Even
   Polycom
   94 Derech Em Hamoshavot
   Petach Tikva, Israel

   EMail: roni.even@polycom.co.il












Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                 [Page 11]

Internet-Draft    HL Requirements for SIP Conferencing    September 2004


Intellectual Property Statement

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

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

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Disclaimer of Validity

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


Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.




Levin & Even             Expires March 2, 2005                 [Page 12]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/