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

Versions: 00 01

Transport Area                                            P. Koskelainen
Internet-Draft                                              H. Khartabil
Expires: April 15, 2004                                            Nokia
                                                        October 16, 2003


          Requirements for Conference Policy Control Protocol
                  draft-koskelainen-xcon-cpcp-reqs-01

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   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 April 15, 2004.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   The conference policy server allows clients to manipulate and
   interact with the conference policy. One mechanism to manipulate the
   policy is to use conference policy control protocol (CPCP). This
   document gives the requirements for CPCP.











Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Integration with Floor Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   5.  Conference Policy Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  CPCP Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.1 Conference creation, termination and joining . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.2 Manipulating general conference attributes . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.3 Authentication and Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.4 Application and media manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.5 ACL manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.6 Floor control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.7 Inviting and ejecting users  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.8 User Privileges  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.9 General Protocol Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 15





























Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


1. Introduction

   The conferencing framework document [3] describes the overall
   architecture, terminology, and protocol components needed for multi-
   party conferencing. It defines a logical function called a conference
   policy server (CPS) which can store and manipulate rules associated
   with participation in a conference.  These rules include directives
   on the lifespan of the conference, who can and cannot join the
   conference, definitions of roles available in the conference and the
   responsibilities associated with those roles, and policies on who is
   allowed to request which roles.

   The conference policy control protocol (CPCP) is a client-server
   protocol that can be used by users to manipulate the rules associated
   with the conference.

   The conference policy is represented by a URI. There is a unique
   conference policy for each conference. The conference policy URI
   points to a conference policy server which can manipulate that
   conference policy.

   Conferencing framework describes also conference notification service
   that is a logical function provided by the focus. It means that the
   focus can act as a notifier, accepting subscriptions to the
   conference state.

   Note that CPCP is not the only mechanism to manipulate conference
   policy, but other mechanisms exists as well, such as Web interface.

   This document can be used with other documents, such as Conferencing
   framework document [3]. Moreover, [5] and [7] give useful background
   information about conferencing and floor control.



















Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


2. Conventions Used in This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.














































Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


3. Terminology

   This document uses the definitions from [3].

   Additional definitions:

      ACL

         Access control list (ACL) defines users who can join a
         conference. Users may have allow, blocked or pending status in
         the list. Each conference has its own ACL.

      Moderator

         A special (privileged) role for a user that is allowed to
         manipulate conference policy and override policy decisions made
         by other users.

      Floor control

         Floor control is a mechanism that enables applications or users
         to gain safe and mutually exclusive or non-exclusive access to
         the shared object or resource in a conference.

      Privilege

         A privilege is a right to perform a manipulation operation in a
         conference. It is user permission such as the right to modify
         ACL or expel users.






















Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


4. Integration with Floor Control

   Floor control is an optional feature often used by conferencing
   applications.  It enables applications or users to gain safe and
   mutually exclusive or non-exclusive input access to a shared object
   or resource. We define a floor as the temporary permission for a
   conference participant to access or manipulate a specific shared
   resource or group of resources.

   We assume that the ability of users to create floors is governed by
   the conference policy. Privileged conference user may use floor
   control protocol (see e.g. [6]) or some other mechanism to create
   floors.

   The conference policy defines who is allowed to create, change, and
   remove floors using the floor control protocol.

   Floor chair is also appointed using the floor control protocol when
   the floor is created.  Typically, only conference moderators are
   allowed to use these commands.

   The conference moderator can remove the floor at any time using floor
   control protocol (so that the resources are no longer floor-
   controlled), or change the floor chair or the floor parameters.

   The floor chair just controls the access to the floor, according to
   the floor policy, defined at a time when the floor is created.
























Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


5. Conference Policy Data Model

   Conference policy data is relatively static. It is not updated
   frequently as e.g. participant list is not part of conference policy.
   Users with sufficient privileges are able to manipulate conference
   policy.  For example, a user with sufficient privileges may
   manipulate conference's access control list by adding a user into the
   ACL allowed list.











































Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


6. CPCP Requirements

   This section describes requirements for the conference policy
   protocol.

6.1 Conference creation, termination and joining

   REQ-A1: It MUST be possible to create a new conference addressable
   with a URI.

   REQ-A2: It MUST be possible to associate policy attributes to a
   conference URI.

   REQ-A3: It MUST be possible to reserve a conference URI for future
   use with or without associating policy attributes to it.

   REQ-A4: It SHOULD be possible for a privileged user to read
   conference policy for a given conference URI, during and before
   joining the conference.

   REQ-A5: It MUST be possible to delete existing conference policy.
   This results in terminating the conference, deleting conference URI
   and releasing all resources associated with it.

   REQ-A6: It SHOULD be possible to anonymously participate in a
   conference.

   REQ-A7: It SHOULD be possible to participate in a conference as a
   hidden user. Hidden user is present in a conference, but his presense
   is not revealed.

6.2 Manipulating general conference attributes

   REQ-B1: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete a conference
   Subject.

   REQ-B2: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference URI
   display name.

   REQ-B3: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference
   creator information (as is seen e.g. in SDP o line).

   REQ-B4: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference URI
   link for more information (as used e.g. in SDP u line).

   REQ-B5: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference host
   contact information (as used e.g. in SDP e and p lines).




Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


   REQ-B6: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete short
   conference session description (as used e.g. in SDP i line).  This
   can be per session or per media.

   REQ-B7: It SHOULD be possible to set, modify and delete the parameter
   for max number of conference participants. This defines how many
   users at max can be present at the same time.

   REQ-B8: It MUST be possible to hide conference related information
   from non-privileged users.

   REQ-B9: It MUST be possible to inactive a conference for defined
   period of time.

   REQ-B10: It SHOULD be possible to set, modify and delete conference
   Keywords. (This may be useful e.g. for search engines).

6.3 Authentication and Security

   REQ-C1: It MUST be possible to define appropriate authentication for
   joining users.

   REQ-C2: It MUST be possible to use sips: scheme as a conference URI.

6.4 Application and media manipulation

   REQ-D1: It MAY be possible to define media policy within conference
   policy.

6.5 ACL manipulation

   REQ-E1: It MUST be possible to define which users are not allowed to
   join the conference.

   REQ-E2: It MUST be possible to define which users are not allowed to
   join a conference in a single operation.

   REQ-E3: It MUST be possible to define which users are allowed to join
   the conference.

   REQ-E4: It MUST be possible to define which users are allowed to join
   a conference in a single operation.

   REQ-E5: It MUST be possible to define which users are places into
   pending list, waiting for further approval e.g. from moderator.

   REQ-E6: It MUST be possible to use wildcards in ACL (such as
   sip:*@example.com is allowed to join).



Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


   REQ-E7: ACL conflicts MUST be solved in a well-defined way (e.g. what
   if user appears both in blocked list and in allowed list) e.g. by
   mandating the order in which ACL definitions are evaluated (e.g. most
   specific expression first).

   REQ-E8: Conference MUST have default policy for those users that no
   matching rule is found in ACL.

   REQ-E9: It MUST be possible to allow and disallow anonymous
   membership in a conference.

   REQ-E10: It MUST be possible to allow and disallow hidden membership
   in a conference.

6.6 Floor control

   REQ-F1: It MUST be possible to assign and de-assign the users who are
   allowed to manipulate floor policy.

6.7 Inviting and ejecting users

   REQ-G1: It MUST be possible to define a dial-out list of users that
   the conference focus invites.

   REQ-G2: It MUST be possible to set a dial-out list in a single
   operation.

   REQ-G3: It MUST be possible to expel users from a currently occurring
   conference.

   REQ-G4: It MUST be possible to expel many users in a single
   operation.

   REQ-G5: It SHOULD be possible to define list of users who the focus
   should refer to the conference (so that the referred users will dial
   in the conference).

   REQ-G6: It SHOULD be possible to set the list of referred users in a
   single operation.

6.8 User Privileges

   REQ-H1: It MUST be possible to give a privilege to a user.

   REQ-H2: It MUST be possible to give privileges to many users in a
   single operation.

   REQ-H3: It MUST be possible to remove a privilege from a user.



Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


   REQ-H4: It MUST be possible to remove privileges from many users in a
   single operation.

   REQ-H5: It SHOULD be possible to define users who are allowed to
   subscribe to conference event package [4]

6.9 General Protocol Requirements

   REQ-CP-1: Protocol behaviour:  CPCP protocol MUST be a reliable
   client-server protocol. Hence, it MUST have a positive response
   indicating that the request has been received, or error response if
   an error has occurred.

   REQ-CP-2: Manipulations of the policy collection MUST exhibit the
   ACID property; that is, they MUST be atomic, be consistent, durable,
   and operate independently.

   REQ-CP-3: It MAY be possible for the client to batch multiple
   operations (such as add a user to ACL blocked list, or remove a user
   from ACL allowed list) into a single request that is processed
   atomically.

   REQ-CP-4: It MUST be possible for the server to authenticate the
   client.

   REQ-CP-5: It MUST be possible for the client to authenticate the
   server.

   REQ-CP-6: It MUST be possible for message integrity to be ensured
   between the client and the server.

   REQ-CP-7: It MUST be possible for privacy to be ensured between the
   client and server.


















Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


7. Acknowledgements

   The author would like to thank Eric Burger, Xiaotao Wu, Henning
   Schulzrinne, Simo Veikkolainen and IETF conferencing design team for
   their feedback.














































Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


Normative References

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

   [2]  Rosenberg et al., J., "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC
        3261, June 2002.

   [3]  Rosenberg, J., "A Framework for Conferencing with the Session
        Initiation Protocol",
        draft-rosenberg-sipping-conferencing-framework-01 (work in
        progress), February 2003.

   [4]  Rosenberg, J., "A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event
        Package for Conference State",
        draft-ietf-sipping-conference-package-01 (work in progress),
        June 2003.


































Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


Informative References

   [5]  Koskelainen, P., Schulzrinne, H. and X. Wu, "Additional
        Requirements to Conferencing", October 2002.

   [6]  Wu, X., Schulzrinne, H. and P. Koskelainen, "Use of SIP and SOAP
        for conference floor control", January 2003.

   [7]  Koskelainen, P., Schulzrinne, H. and X. Wu, "A sip-based
        conference control framework", Nossdav'2002 Miami Beach, May
        2002.


Authors' Addresses

   Petri Koskelainen
   Nokia
   P.O. Box 100 (Visiokatu 1)
   Tampere  FIN-33721
   Finland

   EMail: petri.koskelainen@nokia.com


   Hisham Khartabil
   Nokia
   P.O. Box 321
   Helsinki  FIN-00045
   Finland

   EMail: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com




















Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
   claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this specification can
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION



Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                  CPCP-req                    October 2003


   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Acknowledgement

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











































Koskelainen & Khartabil    Expires April 15, 2004              [Page 16]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/