[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: (draft-korhonen-dime-qos-attributes)
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 RFC 5777
Diameter Maintenance and J. Korhonen, Ed.
Extensions (DIME) TeliaSonera
Internet-Draft H. Tschofenig
Intended status: Standards Track Nokia Siemens Networks
Expires: August 25, 2008 M. Arumaithurai
University of Goettingen
M. Jones
Bridgewater Systems
February 22, 2008
Quality of Service Attributes for Diameter
draft-ietf-dime-qos-attributes-05.txt
Status of this Memo
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 becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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 25, 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
Abstract
This document extends the QoSFilterRule AVP functionality of the
Diameter Base protocol and the functionality of the QoS-Filter-Rule
AVP defined in RFC 4005. The ability to convey Quality of Service
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
information using the AVPs defined in this document is available to
existing and future Diameter applications where permitted by the
command ABNF.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Diameter QoS Defined AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. QoS-Capability AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. QoS-Profile-Template AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. QoS-Resources AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.4. Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5. QoS-Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.6. QoS-Parameters AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.7. QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.8. QoS-Flow-Direction AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Semantics of QoS Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Diameter EAP with QoS Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Diameter NASREQ with QoS Information . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.3. QoS Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.4. Diameter Server Initiated Re-authorization of QoS . . . . 10
5.5. Diameter Credit Control with QoS Information . . . . . . . 11
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 15
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
1. Introduction
This document defines a number of Diameter Quality of Service (QoS)
related AVPs that can be used in existing and future Diameter
applications where permitted by the command ABNF. The Extended-QoS-
Filter-Rule AVP thereby replaces the QoSFilterRule, defined in RFC
3588 [RFC3588], and the QoS-Filter-Rule, defined in RFC 4005
[RFC4005].
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
3. Diameter QoS Defined AVPs
The following table lists the Diameter AVPs used by this document,
their AVP code values, types and possible flag values.
+------------------+
| AVP Flag Rules |
+-------------------------------------------------|----+---+----+----+
| AVP Section |MUST|MAY|SHLD|MUST|
| Attribute Name Code Defined Data Type | | | NOT| NOT|
+-------------------------------------------------+----+---+----+----+
|QoS-Capability TBD 3.1 Grouped | |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Profile-Template TBD 3.2 Unsigned64 | |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Resources TBD 3.3 Grouped | |M,P| | V |
|Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule TBD 3.4 Grouped | |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Semantics TBD 3.5 Enumerated | |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Parameters TBD 3.6 OctetString| |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Rule-Precedence TBD 3.7 Unsigned32 | |M,P| | V |
|QoS-Flow-Direction TBD 3.9 Enumerated | |M,P| | V |
+-------------------------------------------------+----+---+----+----+
3.1. QoS-Capability AVP
The QoS-Capability AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and contains
a list of supported Quality of Service profile templates (and
therefore the support of the respective parameter AVPs).
QoS-Capability ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
1* { QoS-Profile-Template }
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
* [ AVP ]
3.2. QoS-Profile-Template AVP
The QoS-Profile-Template AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned64 and
contains a vendor and a specifier field. The 64-bit value in the
QoS-Profile-Template AVP is structured as shown below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Vendor |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Specifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Vendor Field:
32 bits of IANA SMI Network Management Private Enterprise Code.
The Vendor-ID 0x00000000 is reserved for IANA registered QoS
profiles.
Specifier Field:
32-bit unsigned integer, representing the defined profile value.
An initial QoS profile template is defined with vendor field set to
0x00000000 and the specifier field set to 0. The initial QoS profile
template is described in [I-D.ietf-dime-qos-parameters]. The
registry for the QoS profile templates is created with the same
document.
3.3. QoS-Resources AVP
The QoS-Resources AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped and includes
a description of the Quality of Service resources for policing
traffic flows.
QoS-Resources ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
* [ Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule ]
[ QoS-Flow-State ]
* [ AVP ]
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
3.4. Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP
The Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Grouped
and defines one or more traffic flows together with a set of QoS
parameters that should be applied to the flow(s) by the Resource
Management Function. This AVP re-uses the RADIUS NAS-Traffic-Rule
AVP [I-D.ietf-radext-filter-rules] to describe traffic flows. At
least either one of the NAS-Traffic-Rule or the QoS-Flow-Direction
AVPs SHOULD be included.
Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule ::= < AVP Header: XXX >
{ QoS-Semantics }
{ QoS-Profile-Template }
[ QoS-Parameters ]
[ QoS-Rule-Precedence ]
[ NAS-Traffic-Rule ]
[ QoS-Flow-Direction ]
* [ AVP ]
3.5. QoS-Semantics
The QoS-Semantics AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Enumerated and
provides the semantics for the QoS-Profile-Template and QoS-
Parameters AVPs in the Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule AVP.
This document defines the following values:
(0): QoS-Desired
(1): QoS-Available
(2): QoS-Reserved
(3): Minimum-QoS
(4): QoS-Authorized
3.6. QoS-Parameters AVP
The QoS-Parameters AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type OctetString and
contains Quality of Service parameters. These parameters are defined
in a separate document, see [I-D.ietf-dime-qos-parameters].
3.7. QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP
The QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Unsigned32 and
specifies the execution order of the rules expressed in the QoS-
Resources AVP. Rules with equal precedence MAY be executed in
parallel if supported by the Resource Management Function. If the
QoS-Rule-Precedence AVP is absent from the Extended-QoS-Filter-Rule
AVP, the rules SHOULD be executed in the order in which they appear
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
in the QoS-Resources AVP.
3.8. QoS-Flow-Direction AVP
The QoS-Flow-Direction AVP (AVP Code TBD) is of type Enumerated. It
gives an indication of the direction the provided QoS information
should be applied to. The QoS information can be applied to downlink
flows or to uplink flows. The QoS-Flow-Direction AVP may be used in
conjunction with the NAS-Traffic-Rule AVP. In a case conflicting
definitions between the QoS-Flow-Direction and the NAS-Traffic-Rule,
the QoS-Flow-Direction has precedence meaning the filter rules are
applied only to the flows going to the direction indicated by the
QoS-Flow-Direction AVP. In the absence of the QoS-Flow-Direction the
default treatment is to both directions.
Value | Name and Semantic
------+------------------------------------------------------------
0 | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_BOTH - The QoS information in applied to
| both downlink and uplink flows. This is also the default.
1 | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_DL - The QoS information in applied to
| downlink flows only.
2 | QOS_FLOW_DIRECTION_UL - The QoS information in applied to
| uplink flows only.
4. Semantics of QoS Parameters
The QoS parameters carried in the QoS-Resources AVP may appear in
different messages. The semantic of the QoS parameters depend on the
information provided in the QoS-Semantics AVP which currently defines
5 values, namely QoS-Desired (0), QoS-Available (1), QoS-Reserved
(2), Minimum-QoS (3), and QoS-Authorized (4).
The semantics of the different values are as follows:
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
Object Type Direction Semantic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
QoS-Desired C->S Please authorize the indicated QoS
QoS-Desired C<-S NA
QoS-Available C->S Admission Control at router indicates
that this QoS is available. (note 1)
QoS-Available C<-S Indicated QoS is available. (note 2)
QoS-Reserved C->S Used for reporting during accounting.
QoS-Reserved C<-S NA
Minimum-QoS C->S Indicates that the client is not interested
interested in authorizing QoS that is
lower than Min. QoS
Minimum-QoS C<-S The client must not provide QoS guarantees
lower than Min. QoS
QoS-Authorized C->S NA
QoS-Authorized C<-S Indicated QoS authorized
Legend:
C: Diameter client
S: Diameter server
NA: Not applicable to this document;
no semantic defined in this specification
Notes:
(1) QoS-Available is only useful in relationship with QoS-Desired
(and optionally with Minimum-QoS).
(2) QoS-Available is only useful when the AAA server performs
admission control and knows about the resources in the network.
5. Examples
This section shows a number of signaling flows where QoS negotiation
and authorization is part of the conventional NASREQ, EAP or Credit
Control applications message exchanges. The signalling flows for the
Diameter QoS Application are described in
[I-D.ietf-dime-diameter-qos].
5.1. Diameter EAP with QoS Information
Figure 9 shows a simple signaling flow where a NAS (Diameter Client)
announces its QoS awareness and capabilities included into the DER
message and as part of the access authentication procedure. Upon
completion of the EAP exchange, the Diameter Server provides a pre-
provisioned QoS profile with the QoS-Semantics in the Extended-QoS-
Filter-Rule AVP set to "QoS-Authorized", to the NAS in the final DEA
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
message.
End Diameter Diameter
Host Client server
| | |
| (initiate EAP) | |
|<------------------------------>| |
| | Diameter-EAP-Request |
| | EAP-Payload(EAP Start) |
| | QoS-Capability |
| |------------------------------->|
| | |
| | Diameter-EAP-Answer |
| Result-Code=DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH |
| | EAP-Payload(EAP Request #1) |
| |<-------------------------------|
| EAP Request(Identity) | |
|<-------------------------------| |
: : :
: <<<more message exchanges>>> :
: : :
| | |
| EAP Response #N | |
|------------------------------->| |
| | Diameter-EAP-Request |
| | EAP-Payload(EAP Response #N) |
| |------------------------------->|
| | |
| | Diameter-EAP-Answer |
| | Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS |
| | EAP-Payload(EAP Success) |
| | [EAP-Master-Session-Key] |
| | (authorization AVPs) |
| | QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized) |
| |<-------------------------------|
| | |
| EAP Success | |
|<-------------------------------| |
| | |
Figure 9: Example of a Diameter EAP enhanced with QoS Information
5.2. Diameter NASREQ with QoS Information
Figure 10 shows a similar pre-provisioned QoS signaling as in
Figure 9 but using the NASREQ application instead of EAP application.
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
End Diameter
Host NAS Server
| | |
| Start Network | |
| Attachment | |
|<---------------->| |
| | |
| |AA-Request |
| |NASREQ-Payload |
| |QoS-Capability |
| +----------------------------->|
| | |
| | AA-Answer|
| Result-Code=DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH|
| NASREQ-Payload(NASREQ Request #1)|
| |<-----------------------------+
| | |
| Request | |
|<-----------------+ |
| | |
: : :
: <<<more message exchanges>>> :
: : :
| Response #N | |
+----------------->| |
| | |
| |AA-Request |
| |NASREQ-Payload ( Response #N )|
| +----------------------------->|
| | |
| | AA-Answer|
| | Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS|
| | (authorization AVPs)|
| |QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized) |
| |<-----------------------------+
| | |
| Success | |
|<-----------------+ |
| | |
Figure 10: Example of a Diameter NASREQ enhanced with QoS Information
5.3. QoS Authorization
Figure 11 shows an example of authorization only QoS signaling as
part of the NASREQ message exchange. The NAS provides the Diameter
server with the "QoS-Desired" QoS-Semantics AVP included in the QoS-
Resources AVP. The Diameter server then either authorizes the
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
indicated QoS or rejects the request and informs the NAS about the
result. In this scenario the NAS does not need to include the QoS-
Capability AVP in the AAR message as the QoS-Resources AVP implicitly
does the same and also the NAS is authorizing a specific QoS profile,
not a pre-provisioned one.
End Diameter
Host NAS Server
| | |
| | |
| QoS Request | |
+----------------->| |
| | |
| |AA-Request |
| |Auth-Request-Type=AUTHORIZE_ONLY
| |NASREQ-Payload |
| |QoS-Resources(QoS-Desired) |
| +----------------------------->|
| | |
| | AA-Answer|
| | NASREQ-Payload(Success)|
| | QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized)|
| |<-----------------------------+
| Accept | |
|<-----------------+ |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Figure 11: Example of an Authorization-Only Message Flow
5.4. Diameter Server Initiated Re-authorization of QoS
Figure 12 shows a message exchange for a Diameter server initiated
QoS re-authorization procedure. The Diameter server sends the NAS a
RAR message requesting re-authorization for an existing session and
the NAS acknowledges it with a RAA message. The NAS is aware of its
existing QoS profile and information for the ongoing session that the
Diameter server requested for re-authorization. Thus, the NAS must
initiate re-authorization of the existing QoS profile. The re-
authorization procedure is the same as in Figure 11.
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
End Diameter
Host NAS Server
| | |
| | |
: : :
: <<<Initial Message Exchanges>>> :
: : :
| | |
| | RA-Request |
| |<-----------------------------+
| | |
| |RA-Answer |
| |Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS |
| +----------------------------->|
| | |
| | |
| |AA-Request |
| |NASREQ-Payload |
| |Auth-Request-Type=AUTHORIZE_ONLY
| |QoS-Resources(QoS-Desired) |
| +----------------------------->|
| | |
| | AA-Answer|
| | Result-Code=DIAMETER_SUCCESS|
| | (authorization AVPs)|
| | QoS-Resources(QoS-Authorized)|
| |<-----------------------------+
| | |
Figure 12: Example of a Server-initiated Re-Authorization Procedure
5.5. Diameter Credit Control with QoS Information
In this case the User is charged as soon as the Service Element (CC
client) receives the service request. In this case the client uses
the "QoS-Desired" QoS-Semantics parameter in the QoS-Resources AVP
that it sends to the Accounitng server. The server responds with a
"QoS-Available" QoS-Semantics parameter in the QoS-Resources AVP
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
Service Element
End User (CC Client) B CC Server
| | | |
|(1) Service Request | | |
|-------------------->| | |
| |(2) CCR (event, DIRECT_DEBITING,|
| | QoS-Resources[QoS-desired]) |
| |-------------------------------->|
| |(3) CCA (Granted-Units, QoS- |
| | Resources[QoS-Authorized]) |
| |<--------------------------------|
|(4) Service Delivery | | |
|<--------------------| | |
|(5) Begin service | | |
|<------------------------------------>| |
| | | |
. . . .
. . . .
Figure 13: Example for a One-Time Diameter Credit Control Charging
Event
6. Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Victor Fajardo, Tseno Tsenov, Robert Hancock,
Jukka Manner, Cornelia Kappler, Xiaoming Fu, Frank Alfano, Avi Lior,
Tolga Asveren, Mike Montemurro, Glen Zorn, Avri Doria, Dong Sun, Tina
Tsou, Pete McCann, Georgios Karagiannis and Elwyn Davies for their
comments.
7. IANA Considerations
This specification requests IANA to assignment of new AVPs from the
AVP Code namespace defined in RFC 3588 [RFC3588]. Section 3 lists
the newly defined AVPs.
IANA is requested to allocate a registry for the QoS-Semantics. The
following values are allocated by this specification.
(0): QoS-Desired
(1): QoS-Available
(2): QoS-Reserved
(3): Minimum-QoS
(4): QoS-Authorized
A specification is required to add a new value to the registry. A
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
standards track document is required to depreciate, delete, or modify
existing values.
8. Security Considerations
This document describes the extension of Diameter for conveying
Quality of Service information. The security considerations of the
Diameter protocol itself have been discussed in RFC 3588 [RFC3588].
Use of the AVPs defined in this document MUST take into consideration
the security issues and requirements of the Diameter Base protocol.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dime-qos-parameters]
Korhonen, J. and H. Tschofenig, "Quality of Service
Parameters for Usage with the AAA Framework",
draft-ietf-dime-qos-parameters-01 (work in progress),
September 2007.
[I-D.ietf-radext-filter-rules]
Congdon, P., "RADIUS Attributes for Filtering and
Redirection", draft-ietf-radext-filter-rules-03 (work in
progress), July 2007.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.
[RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton,
"Diameter Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005,
August 2005.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-dime-diameter-qos]
Sun, D., McCann, P., Tschofenig, H., Tsou, T., Doria, A.,
and G. Zorn, "Diameter Quality of Service Application",
draft-ietf-dime-diameter-qos-04 (work in progress),
January 2008.
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
Authors' Addresses
Jouni Korhonen (editor)
TeliaSonera
Teollisuuskatu 13
Sonera FIN-00051
Finland
Email: jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com
Hannes Tschofenig
Nokia Siemens Networks
Otto-Hahn-Ring 6
Munich, Bavaria 81739
Germany
Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com
URI: http://www.tschofenig.com
Mayutan Arumaithurai
University of Goettingen
Email: mayutan.arumaithurai@gmail.com
Mark Jones
Bridgewater Systems
303 Terry Fox Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K2K 3J1
Canada
Email: mark.jones@bridgewatersystems.com
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft QoS Attributes for Diameter February 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Korhonen, et al. Expires August 25, 2008 [Page 15]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/