draft-ietf-drinks-usecases-requirements-06.txt   rfc6461.txt 
DRINKS S. Channabasappa, Ed. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Channabasappa, Ed.
Internet-Draft CableLabs Request for Comments: 6461 CableLabs
Intended status: Informational August 12, 2011 Category: Informational January 2012
Expires: February 13, 2012 ISSN: 2070-1721
Data for Reachability of Inter/tra-NetworK SIP (DRINKS) Use cases and Data for Reachability of Inter-/Intra-NetworK SIP (DRINKS)
Protocol Requirements Use Cases and Protocol Requirements
draft-ietf-drinks-usecases-requirements-06
Abstract Abstract
This document captures the use cases and associated requirements for This document captures the use cases and associated requirements for
interfaces that provision session establishment data into Session interfaces that provision session establishment data into Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP) Service Provider components, to assist with Initiation Protocol (SIP) Service Provider components to assist with
session routing. Specifically, this document focuses on the session routing. Specifically, this document focuses on the
provisioning of one such element, termed the registry. provisioning of one such element termed the "registry".
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the Status of This Memo
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute published for informational purposes.
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 13, 2012. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6461.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Overview ........................................................2
2. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Terminology .....................................................5
3. Registry Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. Registry Use Cases ..............................................6
3.1. Category: Provisioning Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.1. Category: Provisioning Mechanisms ..........................6
3.2. Category: Interconnect Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2. Category: Interconnect Schemes .............................7
3.3. Category: SED Exchange and Discovery Models . . . . . . . 11 3.3. Category: SED Exchange and Discovery Models ................8
3.4. Category: SED Record Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.4. Category: SED Record Content ...............................9
3.5. Category: Separation and Facilitation of Data 3.5. Category: Separation and Facilitation of Data Management ...9
Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.6. Category: Public Identifiers, TN Ranges, and RNs ..........10
3.6. Category: Public Identifiers, TN Ranges and RNs . . . . . 13 3.7. Category: Misc ............................................11
3.7. Category: Misc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4. Requirements ...................................................11
4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.1. Provisioning Mechanisms ...................................12
4.1. Provisioning Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.2. Interconnect Schemes ......................................12
4.2. Interconnect Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.3. SED Exchange and Discovery Requirements ...................12
4.3. SED Exchange and Discovery Requirements . . . . . . . . . 17 4.4. SED Record Content Requirements ...........................12
4.4. SED Record Content Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.5. Data Management Requirements ..............................13
4.5. Data Management Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.6. Public Identifier, TN Range, and RN Requirements ..........13
4.6. Public Identifier, TN Range and RN Requirements . . . . . 18 4.7. Misc. Requirements ........................................13
4.7. Misc. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 5. Security Considerations ........................................14
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6. Acknowledgments ................................................14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7. References .....................................................15
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 7.1. Normative References ......................................15
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7.2. Informative References ....................................15
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
This document reuses terms from [RFC3261] (e.g., SIP, SSP), [RFC5486]
(e.g., LUF, LRF, SED) and [RFC5067] (carrier-of-record and transit
provider). In addition, this document specifies the following
additional terms.
Registry: The authoritative source for provisioned session
establishment data (SED) and related information. A registry can
be part of an SSP or be an independent entity.
Registrar: An entity that provisions and manages data into the
registry. An SSP can act as its own registrar or - additionally
or alternatively - delegate this function to a third party (who
acts as its registrar).
Local Data Repository(LDR): The data store component of an
addressing server that provides resolution responses.
Public Identifier: A public identifier refers to a telephone number
(TN), a SIP address, or other identity as deemed appropriate, such
as a globally routable URI of a user address (e.g.,
sip:john.doe@example.net).
Telephone Number (TN) Range: A numerically contiguous set of
telephone numbers.
Telephone Number (TN) Prefix: A preceding portion of the digits
common across a series of E.164 numbers. A given TN prefix will
include all the valid E.164 numbers that satisfy the expansion
rules mandated by the country or the region that the TNs comply
with.
Routing Number (RN): A Routing Number. For more information, see
[RFC4694].
Destination Group: An aggregation of a set of public identifiers,
TN Ranges, or RNs that share common SED, which is exposed to a
common set of peers.
Data Recipient: An entity with visibility into a specific set of
public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs), the destination groups
that contain these public identifiers (or TN Ranges and RNs), and
a route group's SED records.
Route Group: An aggregation that contains a related set of SED
records, and is associated with a set of destination groups.
Route groups facilitate the management of SED records for one or
more data recipients.
2. Overview 1. Overview
[RFC5486] (Section 3.3) defines Session Establishment Data, or SED, [RFC5486] (Section 3.3) defines Session Establishment Data, or SED,
as the data used to route a call to the next hop associated with the as the data used to route a call to the next hop associated with the
called domain's ingress point. More specifically, the SED is the set called domain's ingress point. More specifically, the SED is the set
of parameters that the outgoing signaling path border elements (SBEs) of parameters that the outgoing signaling path border elements (SBEs)
need to establish a session. However, [RFC5486] does not specify the need to establish a session. However, [RFC5486] does not specify the
protocol(s) or format(s) to provision SED. To pave the way to protocol(s) or format(s) to provision SED. To pave the way to
specify such a protocol, this document presents the use cases and specify such a protocol, this document presents the use cases and
associated requirements that have been proposed to provision SED associated requirements that have been proposed to provision SED.
data.
SED is typically created by the terminating or next-hop SSP and SED is typically created by the terminating or next-hop SIP service
consumed by the originating SSP. To avoid a multitude of bilateral provider (SSP) and consumed by the originating SSP. To avoid a
exchanges, SED is often shared via intermediary systems - termed multitude of bilateral exchanges, SED is often shared via
registries within this document. Such registries receive data via intermediary systems -- termed "registries" within this document.
provisioning transactions from SSPs, and then distribute the received Such registries receive data via provisioning transactions from SSPs,
data into Local Data Repositories (LDRs). These LDRs are used for and then distribute the received data into Local Data Repositories
call routing by outgoing SBEs. This is depicted in Figure 1. (LDRs). These LDRs are used for call routing by outgoing SBEs. This
is depicted in Figure 1.
*-------------* *-------------*
1. Provision SED | | 1. Provision SED | |
-----------------------> | Registry | -----------------------> | Registry |
| | | |
*-------------* *-------------*
/ \ / \
/ \ / \
/ \ / \
/ \ / \
skipping to change at page 6, line 8 skipping to change at page 3, line 29
+----------+ +----------+ +----------+ +----------+
|Local Data| |Local Data| |Local Data| |Local Data|
|Repository| |Repository| |Repository| |Repository|
+----------+ +----------+ +----------+ +----------+
Figure 1: General Diagram Figure 1: General Diagram
In this document, we address the use cases and requirements for In this document, we address the use cases and requirements for
provisioning registries. Data distribution to local data provisioning registries. Data distribution to local data
repositories is out of scope for this document. The resulting repositories is out of scope for this document. The resulting
provisioning protocol can be used to provision data into a registry, provisioning protocol can be used to provision data into a registry
or between multiple registries operating in parallel. In Figure 2, or between multiple registries operating in parallel. In Figure 2,
the case of multiple registries is depicted with dotted lines. the case of multiple registries is depicted with dotted lines.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . registry . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . provision . . . provision .
+-----------+ . +-----------+ +-----------+ . +-----------+
skipping to change at page 6, line 41 skipping to change at page 4, line 13
Figure 2: Functional Overview Figure 2: Functional Overview
In addition, this document proposes two aggregation groups, as In addition, this document proposes two aggregation groups, as
follows: follows:
o Aggregation of public Identifiers into a destination group. o Aggregation of public Identifiers into a destination group.
o Aggregation of SED records into a route group. o Aggregation of SED records into a route group.
The use cases in Section 3.5 provide the rationale. The data model The use cases in Section 3.5 provide the rationale. The data model
depicted in Figure 3 shows the various entities, aggregations and the depicted in Figure 3 shows the various entities, aggregations, and
relationships between them. the relationships between them.
+---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+
| Data |0..n 0..n| Route | 1 0..n| SED | | Data |0..n 0..n| Route | 1 0..n| SED |
|Recepient|------------| Group | --------------| Record | |Recipient|------------| Group | --------------| Record |
+---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+
|0..n |0..n |0..n |0..n
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
|0..n | |0..n |
1 +--------------+ 0..1 | 1 +--------------+ 0..1 |
---------| Destination |--------- | ---------| Destination |--------- |
| | Group | | | | | Group | | |
| +--------------+ | | | +--------------+ | |
skipping to change at page 7, line 37 skipping to change at page 4, line 47
+---------+ +---------+ +----------+ +---------+ +---------+ +----------+
Figure 3: Data Model Diagram Figure 3: Data Model Diagram
The relationships are as described below: The relationships are as described below:
- A public identifier object can be directly related to zero or more - A public identifier object can be directly related to zero or more
SED Record objects, and a SED Record object can be related to SED Record objects, and a SED Record object can be related to
exactly one public identifier object. exactly one public identifier object.
- A destination group object can contain zero or more TN Range - A destination group object can contain zero or more TN (telephone
objects, and a TN Range object can be contained in exactly one number) Range objects, and a TN Range object can be contained in
destination group object. exactly one destination group object.
- A destination group object can contain zero or more public - A destination group object can contain zero or more public
identifier objects, and a public identifier object can be identifier objects, and a public identifier object can be
contained in exactly one destination group object. contained in exactly one destination group object.
- A destination group object can contain zero or more RN objects, - A destination group object can contain zero or more RN (routing
and an RN object can be contained in exactly one destination group number) objects, and an RN object can be contained in exactly one
object. destination group object.
- A route group object can contain zero or more SED Record objects, - A route group object can contain zero or more SED Record objects,
and a SED Record object can be contained in exactly one route and a SED Record object can be contained in exactly one route
group object. group object.
- A route group object can be associated with zero or more - A route group object can be associated with zero or more
destination group objects, and a destination group object can be destination group objects, and a destination group object can be
associated with zero or more route group objects. associated with zero or more route group objects.
- A data recipient object can be associated with zero or more route - A data recipient object can be associated with zero or more route
group objects, and a route group object can refer to zero or more group objects, and a route group object can refer to zero or more
data recipient objects. data recipient objects.
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
This document reuses terms from [RFC3261] (e.g., SIP), [RFC5486]
(e.g., SSP, LUF, LRF, SED) and [RFC5067] (carrier-of-record and
transit provider). In addition, this document specifies the
following additional terms.
Registry: The authoritative source for provisioned session
establishment data (SED) and related information. A registry can
be part of an SSP or be an independent entity.
Registrar: An entity that provisions and manages data into the
registry. An SSP can act as its own registrar or -- additionally
or alternatively -- delegate this function to a third party (who
acts as its registrar).
Local Data Repository (LDR): The data store component of an
addressing server that provides resolution responses.
Public Identifier: A public identifier refers to a telephone number
(TN), a SIP address, or other identity as deemed appropriate, such
as a globally routable URI of a user address (e.g.,
sip:john.doe@example.net).
Telephone Number (TN) Range: A numerically contiguous set of
telephone numbers.
Telephone Number (TN) Prefix: A preceding portion of the digits
common across a series of E.164 numbers. A given TN prefix will
include all the valid E.164 numbers that satisfy the expansion
rules mandated by the country or the region with which the TNs
comply.
Routing Number (RN): A Routing Number. For more information, see
[RFC4694].
Destination Group: An aggregation of a set of public identifiers, TN
Ranges, or RNs that share common SED, which is exposed to a common
set of peers.
Data Recipient: An entity with visibility into a specific set of
public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs), the destination groups
that contain these public identifiers (or TN Ranges and RNs), and
a route group's SED records.
Route Group: An aggregation that contains a related set of SED
records and is associated with a set of destination groups. Route
groups facilitate the management of SED records for one or more
data recipients.
3. Registry Use Cases 3. Registry Use Cases
This Section documents use cases related to the provisioning of the This section documents use cases related to the provisioning of the
registry. Any request to provision, modify or delete data is subject registry. Any request to provision, modify, or delete data is
to several security considerations (see Section Section 5). This subject to several security considerations (see Section 5). The
document does not address these considerations. The protocols that protocols that implement these use cases (and associated
implement these use cases (and associated requirements) will need to requirements) will need to explicitly identify and address them.
explicitly identify and address them.
3.1. Category: Provisioning Mechanisms 3.1. Category: Provisioning Mechanisms
UC PROV #1 Real-Time Provisioning: Registrars have operational UC PROV #1 Real-Time Provisioning: Registrars have operational
systems that provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges systems that provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges
or RNs), in association with their SED. These systems or RNs) in association with their SED. These systems
often function in a manner that expect or require that often function in a manner that expects or requires that
these provisioning activities be completed immediately, these provisioning activities be completed immediately,
as apposed to an out-of-band or batch provisioning scheme as opposed to an out-of-band or batch provisioning scheme
that can occur at a later time. This type of that can occur at a later time. This type of
provisioning is referred to as real-time, or on-demand provisioning is referred to as "real-time" or "on-demand"
provisioning. provisioning.
UC PROV #2 Non-Real-Time Bulk Provisioning: Operational systems that UC PROV #2 Non-Real-Time Bulk Provisioning: Operational systems that
provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs) and provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs) and
associated SED sometimes expect that these provisioning associated SED sometimes expect that these provisioning
activities be batched up into large sets. These batched activities be batched up into large sets. These batched
requests are then processed using a provisioning requests are then processed using a provisioning
mechanism that is out-of-band and occurs at a later time. mechanism that is out of band and occurs at a later time.
UC PROV #3 Multi-Request Provisioning: Regardless of whether a UC PROV #3 Multi-Request Provisioning: Regardless of whether or not
provisioning action is performed in real-time or not, a provisioning action is performed in real time, SSPs
SSPs often perform several provisioning actions on often perform several provisioning actions on several
several objects in a single request or transaction. This objects in a single request or transaction. This is done
is done for performance and scalability reasons, and for for performance and scalability reasons, and for
transactional reasons, such that the set of provisioning transactional reasons, such that the set of provisioning
actions either fail or succeed atomically, as a complete actions either fail or succeed atomically, as a complete
set. set.
3.2. Category: Interconnect Schemes 3.2. Category: Interconnect Schemes
UC INTERCONNECT #1 Inter-SSP SED: SSPs create peering relationships UC INTERCONNECT #1 Inter-SSP SED: SSPs create peering relationships
with other SSPs in order to establish with other SSPs in order to establish
interconnects. Establishing these interconnects interconnects. Establishing these interconnects
involves, among other things, communicating and involves, among other things, communicating and
enabling the points of ingress and other SED used enabling the points of ingress and other SED used
to establish sessions. to establish sessions.
UC INTERCONNECT #2 Direct and Indirect Peering: Some inter-SSP UC INTERCONNECT #2 Direct and Indirect Peering: Some inter-SSP
peering relationships are created to enable the peering relationships are created to enable the
establishment of sessions to the public establishment of sessions to the public
skipping to change at page 10, line 15 skipping to change at page 7, line 34
with other SSPs in order to establish with other SSPs in order to establish
interconnects. Establishing these interconnects interconnects. Establishing these interconnects
involves, among other things, communicating and involves, among other things, communicating and
enabling the points of ingress and other SED used enabling the points of ingress and other SED used
to establish sessions. to establish sessions.
UC INTERCONNECT #2 Direct and Indirect Peering: Some inter-SSP UC INTERCONNECT #2 Direct and Indirect Peering: Some inter-SSP
peering relationships are created to enable the peering relationships are created to enable the
establishment of sessions to the public establishment of sessions to the public
identifiers for which an SSP is the carrier-of- identifiers for which an SSP is the carrier-of-
record. This is referred to as direct peering. record. This is referred to as "direct peering".
Other inter-SSP peering relationships are created Other inter-SSP peering relationships are created
to enable the establishment of sessions to public to enable the establishment of sessions to public
identifiers for which an SSP is a transit identifiers for which an SSP is a transit
provider. This is referred to as indirect provider. This is referred to as "indirect
peering. Some SSPs take into consideration an peering". Some SSPs take into consideration an
SSP's role as a transit or carrier-of-record SSP's role as a transit or carrier-of-record
provider when selecting a route to a public provider when selecting a route to a public
identifier. identifier.
UC INTERCONNECT #3 Intra-SSP SED: SSPs support the establishment of UC INTERCONNECT #3 Intra-SSP SED: SSPs support the establishment of
sessions between their own public identifiers, sessions between their own public identifiers,
not just to other SSPs' public identifiers. not just to other SSPs' public identifiers.
Enabling this involves, among other things, Enabling this involves, among other things,
communicating and enabling intra-SSP signaling communicating and enabling intra-SSP signaling
points and other SED that can differ from inter- points and other SED that can differ from inter-
SSP signaling points and SED. SSP signaling points and SED.
UC INTERCONNECT #4 Selective Peering (a.k.a. per peer policies): UC INTERCONNECT #4 Selective Peering (a.k.a. per-peer policies):
SSPs create peering relationships with other SSPs SSPs create peering relationships with other SSPs
in order to establish interconnects. However, in order to establish interconnects. However,
SSPs peering relationships often result in SSP peering relationships often result in
different points of ingress or other SED for the different points of ingress or other SED for the
same set of public identifiers. This is referred same set of public identifiers. This is referred
to as selective peering, and is done on a route to as "selective peering" and is done on a route
group basis. group basis.
UC INTERCONNECT #5 Provisioning of a delegated hierarchy: An SSP may UC INTERCONNECT #5 Provisioning of a delegated hierarchy: An SSP may
decide to maintain its own infrastructure to decide to maintain its own infrastructure to
contain the route records that constitute the contain the route records that constitute the
terminal step in the LUF. In such cases, the SSP terminal step in the LUF. In such cases, the SSP
will provision registries to direct queries for will provision registries to direct queries for
the SSP's public identifiers to its own the SSP's public identifiers to its own
infrastructure, rather than provisioning the infrastructure rather than provisioning the route
route records directly. For example, in the case records directly. For example, in the case of
of DNS-based route records, such a delegated DNS-based route records, such a delegated
hierarchy would make use of NS and CNAME records, hierarchy would make use of NS and CNAME records,
while a flat structure would make use of NAPTR while a flat structure would make use of NAPTR
resource records. resource records.
3.3. Category: SED Exchange and Discovery Models 3.3. Category: SED Exchange and Discovery Models
UC SED EXCHANGE #1 SED Exchange and Discovery using unified LUF/LRF: UC SED EXCHANGE #1 SED Exchange and Discovery using unified LUF/LRF:
When establishing peering relationships some SSPs When establishing peering relationships, some
may wish to communicate or receive SED (e.g., SSPs may wish to communicate or receive SED
points of ingress) that constitutes the (e.g., points of ingress) that constitutes the
aggregated result of both LUF and LRF. aggregated result of both LUF and LRF.
UC SED EXCHANGE #2 SED Exchange and Discovery using LUF's Domain UC SED EXCHANGE #2 SED Exchange and Discovery using LUF's Domain
Name: When establishing peering relationships Name: When establishing peering relationships,
some SSPs may not wish to communicate or receive some SSPs may not wish to communicate or receive
points of ingress and other SED using a registry. points of ingress and other SED using a registry.
They wish to only communicate or receive domain They only wish to communicate or receive domain
names (LUF step only), and then independently names (LUF step only), and then independently
resolvable those domain names via [RFC3263] to resolve those domain names via [RFC3263] to the
the final points of ingress data (and other SED). final points of ingress data (and other SED).
UC SED EXCHANGE #3 SED Exchange and Discovery using LUF's UC SED EXCHANGE #3 SED Exchange and Discovery using LUF's
Administrative Domain Identifier: When Administrative Domain Identifier: When
establishing peering relationships some SSPs may establishing peering relationships, some SSPs may
not wish to communicate or receive points of not wish to communicate or receive points of
ingress and other SED using a registry. They ingress and other SED using a registry. They
wish to only communicate or receive an only wish to communicate or receive an
administrative domain identifier, which is not administrative domain identifier, which is not
necessarily resolvable via DNS. The subsequent necessarily resolvable via DNS. The subsequent
process of using that administrative domain process of using that administrative domain
identifier to select points of ingress or other identifier to select points of ingress or other
SED can be SSP specific and is out of scope for SED can be SSP specific and is out of scope for
this document. this document.
UC SED EXCHANGE #4 Co-existent SED Exchange and Discovery Models: UC SED EXCHANGE #4 Coexistent SED Exchange and Discovery Models:
When supporting multiple peering relationships When supporting multiple peering relationships,
some SSPs have the need to concurrently support some SSPs have the need to concurrently support
all three of the SED Exchange and Discovery all three of the SED Exchange and Discovery
Models already described in this Section Models already described in this section
(Section 3.3), for the same set of public (Section 3.3) for the same set of public
identifiers. identifiers.
3.4. Category: SED Record Content 3.4. Category: SED Record Content
UC SED RECORD #1 SED Record Content: Establishing interconnects UC SED RECORD #1 SED Record Content: Establishing interconnects
between SSPs involves, among other things, between SSPs involves, among other things,
communicating points of ingress, the service types communicating points of ingress, the service types
(SIP, SIPS, etc) supported by each point of (SIP, SIPS, etc.) supported by each point of
ingress, and the relative priority of each point of ingress, and the relative priority of each point of
ingress for each service type. ingress for each service type.
UC SED RECORD #2 Time-To-Live (TTL): For performance reasons, UC SED RECORD #2 Time-To-Live (TTL): For performance reasons,
querying SSPs sometimes cache SED that had been querying SSPs sometimes cache SED that had been
previously looked up for a given public identifier. previously looked up for a given public identifier.
In order to accomplish this, SSPs sometimes specify In order to accomplish this, SSPs sometimes specify
the TTL associated with a given SED record. the TTL associated with a given SED record.
3.5. Category: Separation and Facilitation of Data Management 3.5. Category: Separation and Facilitation of Data Management
UC DATA #1 Separation of Provisioning Responsibility: An SSP's UC DATA #1 Separation of Provisioning Responsibility: An SSP's
operational practices often separate the responsibility operational practices often separate the responsibility
of provisioning the points of ingress and other SED, from of provisioning the points of ingress and other SED from
the responsibility of provisioning public identifiers (or the responsibility of provisioning public identifiers (or
TN ranges or RNs). For example, a network engineer can TN Ranges or RNs). For example, a network engineer can
establish a physical interconnect with a peering SSP's establish a physical interconnect with a peering SSP's
network and provision the associated domain name, host, network and provision the associated domain name, host,
and IP addressing information. Separately, for each new and IP addressing information. Separately, for each new
subscriber, the SSP's provisioning systems provision the subscriber, the SSP's provisioning systems provision the
associated public identifiers. associated public identifiers.
UC DATA #2 Destination Groups: SSPs often provision identical SED UC DATA #2 Destination Groups: SSPs often provision identical SED
for large numbers of public identifiers (or TN Ranges or for large numbers of public identifiers (or TN Ranges or
RNs). For reasons of efficiency, groups of public RNs). For reasons of efficiency, groups of public
identifiers that have the same SED can be aggregated. identifiers that have the same SED can be aggregated.
skipping to change at page 13, line 17 skipping to change at page 10, line 12
rather than with each individual public identifier (or TN rather than with each individual public identifier (or TN
Ranges or RNs). Ranges or RNs).
UC DATA #3 Route Groups: SSPs often provision identical SED for UC DATA #3 Route Groups: SSPs often provision identical SED for
large numbers of public identifiers (or TN Ranges or large numbers of public identifiers (or TN Ranges or
RNs), and then expose that relationship between a group RNs), and then expose that relationship between a group
of SED records and a group of public identifiers (or TN of SED records and a group of public identifiers (or TN
Ranges or RNs) to one or more SSPs. This combined Ranges or RNs) to one or more SSPs. This combined
grouping of SED records and destination groups grouping of SED records and destination groups
facilitates efficient management of relationships and the facilitates efficient management of relationships and the
list of peers (data recipients) that can lookup public list of peers (data recipients) that can look up public
identifiers and receive the associated SED. This dual identifiers and receive the associated SED. This dual
set of SED Records and destination groups is termed as a set of SED records and destination groups is termed a
route group. "route group".
3.6. Category: Public Identifiers, TN Ranges and RNs 3.6. Category: Public Identifiers, TN Ranges, and RNs
UC PI #1 Additions and deletions: SSPs often allocate and de- UC PI #1 Additions and Deletions: SSPs often allocate and de-
allocate specific public identifiers to and from end-users. allocate specific public identifiers to and from end-users.
This involves, among other things, activating or This involves, among other things, activating or
deactivating specific public identifiers (TN ranges or deactivating specific public identifiers (TN Ranges or
RNs), and directly or indirectly associating them with the RNs), and directly or indirectly associating them with the
appropriate points of ingress and other SED. appropriate points of ingress and other SED.
UC PI #2 Carrier-of-Record vs Transit Provisioning: Some inter-SSP UC PI #2 Carrier-of-Record versus Transit Provisioning: Some inter-
peering relationships are created to enable the SSP peering relationships are created to enable the
establishment of sessions to the public identifiers (or TN establishment of sessions to the public identifiers (or TN
Ranges or RNs) for which an SSP is the carrier-of-record. Ranges or RNs) for which an SSP is the carrier-of-record.
Other inter-SSP peering relationships are created to enable Other inter-SSP peering relationships are created to enable
the establishment of sessions for which an SSP is a transit the establishment of sessions for which an SSP is a transit
provider. Some SSPs take into consideration an SSP's role provider. Some SSPs take into consideration an SSP's role
as a transit or carrier-of-record provider when selecting a as a transit or carrier-of-record provider when selecting a
route. route.
UC PI #3 Multiplicity: As described in previous use cases, SSPs UC PI #3 Multiplicity: As described in previous use cases, SSPs
provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs) and provision public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs) and
skipping to change at page 14, line 13 skipping to change at page 10, line 49
the carrier-of-record and transit provider. As a result, a the carrier-of-record and transit provider. As a result, a
given public identifier (or TN Range or RN) key can reside given public identifier (or TN Range or RN) key can reside
in multiple destination groups at any given time. in multiple destination groups at any given time.
UC PI #4 Destination Group Modification: SSPs often change the SED UC PI #4 Destination Group Modification: SSPs often change the SED
associated with a given public identifier (or TN Range or associated with a given public identifier (or TN Range or
RN). This involves, among other things, directly or RN). This involves, among other things, directly or
indirectly associating them with a different point of indirectly associating them with a different point of
ingress, different services, or different SED. ingress, different services, or different SED.
UC PI #5 Carrier-Of-Record vs Transit Modification: SSPs may have UC PI #5 Carrier-of-Record versus Transit Modification: SSPs may
the need to change their Carrier-Of-Record vs Transit role have the need to change their carrier-of-record versus
for public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs) that they transit role for public identifiers (or TN Ranges or RNs)
previously provisioned. that they previously provisioned.
UC PI #6 Modification of authority: An SSP indicates that it is the UC PI #6 Modification of Authority: An SSP indicates that it is the
carrier-of-record for an existing public identifier or TN carrier-of-record for an existing public identifier or TN
Range. If the public identifier or TN Range was previously Range. If the public identifier or TN Range were
associated with a different carrier-of-record then there previously associated with a different carrier-of-record,
are multiple possible outcomes, such as: a) the previous then there are multiple possible outcomes, such as a) the
carrier-of-record is disassociated, b) the previous previous carrier-of-record is disassociated, b) the
carrier-of-record is relegated to transit status, or c) the previous carrier-of-record is relegated to transit status,
new carrier-of-record is placed in inactive mode. The or c) the new carrier-of-record is placed in inactive mode.
choice may be dependent on the deployment scenario, and is The choice may be dependent on the deployment scenario and
out of scope for this document. is out of scope for this document.
3.7. Category: Misc 3.7. Category: Misc
UC MISC #1 Number Portability: The SSP wishes to provide, in query UC MISC #1 Number Portability: The SSP wishes to provide, in query
response to public identifiers, an associated routing response to public identifiers, an associated routing
number (RN). This is the case where a set of public number (RN). This is the case where a set of public
identifiers is no longer associated with original SSP but identifiers is no longer associated with the original SSP
have been ported to a recipient SSP, who provides access but has been ported to a recipient SSP, who provides
to these identifiers via a switch on the Signaling System access to these identifiers via a switch on the Signaling
Number 7 network identified by the RN. System Number 7 network identified by the RN.
UC MISC #2 Data Recipient Offer and Accept: When a peering UC MISC #2 Data Recipient Offer and Accept: When a peering
relationship is established (or invalidated) SSPs relationship is established (or invalidated), SSPs
provision (or remove) data recipients in the registry. provision (or remove) data recipients in the registry.
However, a peer may first need to accept it's role (as a However, a peer may first need to accept its role (as a
data recipient) before such a change is made effective. data recipient) before such a change is made effective.
Alternatively an auto-accept feature can be configured Alternatively, an auto-accept feature can be configured
for a given data recipient. for a given data recipient.
UC MISC #3 Open numbering plans: In several countries, an open UC MISC #3 Open Numbering Plans: In several countries, an open
numbering plan is used, where the carrier-of-record is numbering plan is used, where the carrier-of-record is
only aware of a portion of the E.164 number (i.e., the TN only aware of a portion of the E.164 number (i.e., the TN
prefix). The carrier-of-record may not know the complete prefix). The carrier-of-record may not know the complete
number, or the number of digits in the number. The rest number or the number of digits in the number. The rest
of the digits are handled offline (e.g., by a Private of the digits are handled offline (e.g., by a Private
Branch Exchange, or PBX). For example, an SSP can be the Branch Exchange, or PBX). For example, an SSP can be the
carrier-of-record for "+123456789", and is also the carrier-of-record for "+123456789" and be the carrier-of-
carrier-of-record for every possible expansion of that record for every possible expansion of that number, such
number such as "+12345678901" and "+123456789012", even as "+12345678901" and "+123456789012", even though the
though the SSP does not know what those expansions could SSP does not know what those expansions could be. This
be. This can be described as the carrier-of-record can be described as the carrier-of-record effectively
effectively being authoritative for the TN prefix. being authoritative for the TN prefix.
4. Requirements 4. Requirements
This Section lists the requirements extracted from the use cases in This section lists the requirements extracted from the use cases in
Section 3. The objective is to make it easier for protocol designers Section 3. The objective is to make it easier for protocol designers
to understand the underlying requirements, and to reference and list to understand the underlying requirements and to reference and list
the requirements that they support (or not). The requirements listed the requirements that they support (or not). The requirements listed
here, unless explicitly indicated otherwise, are expected to be here, unless explicitly indicated otherwise, are expected to be
supported. Protocol proposals are also expected to indicate their supported. Protocol proposals are also expected to indicate their
compliance with these requirements, and highlight ones that they compliance with these requirements and highlight ones that they don't
don't meet (if any). Furthermore, the requirements listed here are meet (if any). Furthermore, the requirements listed here are not
not meant to be limiting, i.e., protocol implementations and meant to be limiting, i.e., protocol implementations and deployments
deployments may choose to support additional requirements based on may choose to support additional requirements based on use cases that
use cases that are not listed in this document. are not listed in this document.
4.1. Provisioning Mechanisms 4.1. Provisioning Mechanisms
REQ-PROV-1: Real-time provisioning. REQ-PROV-1: Real-time provisioning.
REQ-PROV-2: (Optional) Non-real-time bulk provisioning. REQ-PROV-2: (Optional) Non-real-time bulk provisioning.
REQ-PROV-3: Multi-request provisioning. REQ-PROV-3: Multi-request provisioning.
4.2. Interconnect Schemes 4.2. Interconnect Schemes
skipping to change at page 17, line 17 skipping to change at page 12, line 43
4.3. SED Exchange and Discovery Requirements 4.3. SED Exchange and Discovery Requirements
REQ-SED-1: SED containing unified LUF and LRF content. REQ-SED-1: SED containing unified LUF and LRF content.
REQ-SED-2: SED containing LUF-only data using domain names. REQ-SED-2: SED containing LUF-only data using domain names.
REQ-SED-3: SED containing LUF-only data using administrative REQ-SED-3: SED containing LUF-only data using administrative
domains. domains.
REQ-SED-4: Support for all the other REQ-SED requirements (listed in REQ-SED-4: Support for all the other REQ-SED requirements (listed in
this Section), concurrently, for the same public this section), concurrently, for the same public
identifier (or TN Range or RN). identifier (or TN Range or RN).
4.4. SED Record Content Requirements 4.4. SED Record Content Requirements
REQ-SED-RECORD-1: Ability to provision SED record content. REQ-SED-RECORD-1: Ability to provision SED record content.
REQ-SED-RECORD-2: (Optional) Communication of an associated TTL for REQ-SED-RECORD-2: (Optional) Communication of an associated TTL for
a SED Record. a SED Record.
4.5. Data Management Requirements 4.5. Data Management Requirements
skipping to change at page 18, line 8 skipping to change at page 13, line 17
REQ-DATA-MGMT-1: Separation of responsibility for the provisioning REQ-DATA-MGMT-1: Separation of responsibility for the provisioning
the points of ingress and other SED, from the the points of ingress and other SED, from the
responsibility of provisioning public identifiers. responsibility of provisioning public identifiers.
REQ-DATA-MGMT-2: Ability to aggregate a set of public identifiers as REQ-DATA-MGMT-2: Ability to aggregate a set of public identifiers as
destination groups. destination groups.
REQ-DATA-MGMT-3: Ability to create the aggregation termed route REQ-DATA-MGMT-3: Ability to create the aggregation termed route
group. group.
4.6. Public Identifier, TN Range and RN Requirements 4.6. Public Identifier, TN Range, and RN Requirements
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-1: Provisioning of, and modifications to, the REQ-PI-TNR-RN-1: Provisioning of, and modifications to, the
following aggregations: destination group and route following aggregations: destination group and route
groups. groups.
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-2: Ability to distinguish an SSP as either the REQ-PI-TNR-RN-2: Ability to distinguish an SSP as either the
carrier-of-record provider or transit provider. carrier-of-record provider or the transit provider.
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-3: A given public identifier (or TN Range or RN) can REQ-PI-TNR-RN-3: A given public identifier (or TN Range or RN) can
reside in multiple destination groups at the same reside in multiple destination groups at the same
time. time.
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-4: Modification of public identifier (or TN Range or REQ-PI-TNR-RN-4: Modification of public identifier (or TN Range or
RN) by allowing them to be moved to a different RN) by allowing them to be moved to a different
destination group via an atomic operation. destination group via an atomic operation.
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-5: SSPs can indicate a change to their role from REQ-PI-TNR-RN-5: SSPs can indicate a change to their role from
carrier-of-record provider to transit, or vice- carrier-of-record provider to transit, or vice
versa. versa.
REQ-PI-TNR-RN-6: Support for modification of authority with the REQ-PI-TNR-RN-6: Support for modification of authority with the
conditions described in UC PI #6. conditions described in UC PI #6.
4.7. Misc. Requirements 4.7. Misc. Requirements
REQ-MISC-1: Number portability support. REQ-MISC-1: Number portability support.
REQ-MISC-2: Ability for the SSP to be offered a peering REQ-MISC-2: Ability for the SSP to be offered a peering relationship
relationship, and for the SSP to accept (explicitly or and for the SSP to accept (explicitly or implicitly) or
implicitly) or reject such an offer. reject such an offer.
REQ-MISC-3: Support for open numbering plans. REQ-MISC-3: Support for open numbering plans.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
Session establishment data allows for the routing of SIP sessions Session establishment data allows for the routing of SIP sessions
within, and between, SIP Service Providers. Access to this data can within, and between, SIP Service Providers. Access to this data can
compromise the routing of sessions and expose a SIP Service Provider compromise the routing of sessions and expose a SIP Service Provider
to attacks such as service hijacking and denial of service. The data to attacks such as service hijacking and denial of service. The data
can be compromised by vulnerable functional components and interfaces can be compromised by vulnerable functional components and interfaces
identified within the use cases. identified within the use cases.
A provisioning protocol or interface that implements the described A provisioning framework or protocol that implements the described
use cases MUST therefore provide data confidentiality, and MUST use cases MUST, therefore, provide data confidentiality and message
ensure message integrity for the provisioning flow. Authentication integrity. Such frameworks and protocols MUST specify mechanisms to
and authorization of the provisioning entities are REQUIRED features authenticate and authorize any entity that provisions data into the
of the protocol and interfaces. registry, i.e., that the entity is who it says it is and is allowed
to use the provisioning interface. The determination of whether such
6. IANA Considerations an entity is authorized to provision specific data elements (e.g., a
certain public identifier or TN Range) -- while REQUIRED -- may be
This document does not register any values in IANA registries, nor left to local policy.
request the creation of a registry.
7. Acknowledgments 6. Acknowledgments
This document is a result of various contributions from (and This document is a result of various contributions from (and
discussions within) the IETF DRINKS Working Group; specifically, in discussions within) the IETF DRINKS Working Group; specifically, in
alphabetical order: Alexander Mayrhofer, Deborah A Guyton, Gregory alphabetical order: Alexander Mayrhofer, Deborah A Guyton, Gregory
Schumacher, Jean-Francois Mule, Kenneth Cartwright, Manjul Maharishi, Schumacher, Jean-Francois Mule, Kenneth Cartwright, Manjul Maharishi,
Penn Pfautz, Ray Bellis, Richard Shockey, and Syed Ali. Penn Pfautz, Ray Bellis, Richard Shockey, and Syed Ali.
The editor also wishes to thank the following for their comments and The editor also wishes to thank the following for their comments and
suggestions: Otmar Lendl, Sohel Khan, Peter Koch, Brian Rosen, Jon suggestions: Otmar Lendl, Sohel Khan, Peter Koch, Brian Rosen, Jon
Peterson and Gonzalo Camarillo. Peterson, Gonzalo Camarillo, and Stephen Farrell.
8. References 7. References
8.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5486] Malas, D. and D. Meyer, "Session Peering for Multimedia [RFC5486] Malas, D. and D. Meyer, "Session Peering for Multimedia
Interconnect (SPEERMINT) Terminology", RFC 5486, Interconnect (SPEERMINT) Terminology", RFC 5486,
March 2009. March 2009.
8.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
June 2002. June 2002.
[RFC3263] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation [RFC3263] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263, Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263,
June 2002. June 2002.
[RFC4694] Yu, J., "Number Portability Parameters for the "tel" URI", [RFC4694] Yu, J., "Number Portability Parameters for the "tel" URI",
RFC 4694, October 2006. RFC 4694, October 2006.
[RFC5067] Lind, S. and P. Pfautz, "Infrastructure ENUM [RFC5067] Lind, S. and P. Pfautz, "Infrastructure ENUM
Requirements", RFC 5067, November 2007. Requirements", RFC 5067, November 2007.
Author's Address Author's Address
Sumanth Channabasappa Sumanth Channabasappa (editor)
CableLabs CableLabs
858 Coal Creek Circle 858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027 Louisville, CO 80027
USA USA
Email: sumanth@cablelabs.com EMail: sumanth@cablelabs.com
 End of changes. 75 change blocks. 
230 lines changed or deleted 224 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/