draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-06.txt   draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-07.txt 
P2PSIP Working Group D. Bryan P2PSIP Working Group D. Bryan
Internet-Draft Cogent Force, LLC Internet-Draft Cogent Force, LLC
Intended status: Informational P. Matthews Intended status: Informational P. Matthews
Expires: December 15, 2014 Alcatel-Lucent Expires: November 9, 2015 Alcatel-Lucent
E. Shim E. Shim
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
D. Willis D. Willis
Softarmor Systems Softarmor Systems
S. Dawkins S. Dawkins
Huawei (USA) Huawei (USA)
June 13, 2014 May 8, 2015
Concepts and Terminology for Peer to Peer SIP Concepts and Terminology for Peer to Peer SIP
draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-06 draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-07
Abstract Abstract
This document defines concepts and terminology for the use of the This document defines concepts and terminology for the use of the
Session Initiation Protocol in a peer-to-peer environment where the Session Initiation Protocol in a peer-to-peer environment where the
traditional proxy-registrar and message routing functions are traditional proxy-registrar and message routing functions are
replaced by a distributed mechanism. These mechanisms may be replaced by a distributed mechanism. These mechanisms may be
implemented using a distributed hash table or other distributed data implemented using a distributed hash table or other distributed data
mechanism with similar external properties. This document includes a mechanism with similar external properties. This document includes a
high-level view of the functional relationships between the network high-level view of the functional relationships between the network
skipping to change at page 1, line 47 skipping to change at page 1, line 47
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 15, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 9, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 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
skipping to change at page 3, line 10 skipping to change at page 3, line 10
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Editor's Notes and Changes To This Version . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Editor's Notes and Changes To This Version . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. High-Level Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. High-Level Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Clients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Relationship Between P2PSIP and RELOAD . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3. Relationship Between P2PSIP and RELOAD . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. Relationship Between P2PSIP and SIP . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4. Relationship Between P2PSIP and SIP . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5. Relationship Between P2PSIP and Other AoR 3.5. Relationship Between P2PSIP and Other AoR
Dereferencing Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Dereferencing Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.6. NAT Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.6. NAT Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Reference Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Reference Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.1. The Distributed Database Function . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1. The Distributed Database Function . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.2. Using the Distributed Database Function . . . . . . . . . 14 6.2. Using the Distributed Database Function . . . . . . . . . 14
6.3. NAT Traversal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.3. NAT Traversal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.4. Locating and Joining an Overlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.4. Locating and Joining an Overlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.5. Clients and Connecting Unmodified SIP Devices . . . . . . 16 6.5. Clients and Connecting Unmodified SIP Devices . . . . . . 16
6.6. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.6. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Editor's Notes and Changes To This Version 1. Editor's Notes and Changes To This Version
This version of the draft represents a very minor revision of version This version of the draft represents almost no change from -06, which
-05 and is intended to restart conversation on this draft in the itself was a very minor revision of version -05 and is intended to
group, to identify open issues, address them, and complete work on restart conversation on this draft in the group, to identify open
the document in light of RELOAD being issued as an RFC. issues, address them, and complete work on the document in light of
RELOAD being issued as an RFC.
It is currently believed this draft's terminology is inline with RFC
6940. Please report any discrepancies to the editors of this
document.
Version -03 represented a substantial revision from the previous Version -03 represented a substantial revision from the previous
version. Until -02, this work was tracking open questions and being version. Until -02, this work was tracking open questions and being
used to help reach consensus on a draft. With the selection of used to help reach consensus on a draft. With the selection of
RELOAD as the protocol for this WG, the focus of the group turned to RELOAD as the protocol for this WG, the focus of the group turned to
completing the RELOAD draft, and the WG directed the editors to completing the RELOAD draft, and the WG directed the editors to
update the document to reflect the decisions made in RELOAD upon update the document to reflect the decisions made in RELOAD upon
completion. completion.
Please see Section 7 for the list of major open issues. Please see Section 7 for the list of major open issues.
skipping to change at page 17, line 29 skipping to change at page 17, line 38
| | | |
| SIP, other apps... | | SIP, other apps... |
| ___________________| | ___________________|
| | RELOAD Layer | | | RELOAD Layer |
|______|___________________| |______|___________________|
| Transport Layer | | Transport Layer |
|__________________________| |__________________________|
7. Open Issues 7. Open Issues
MAJOR OPEN ISSUE: The initial wording in the high-level description OPEN ISSUE: The initial wording in the high-level description about
about proving AoR to contact mapping reflects a very long and proving AoR to contact mapping reflects a very long and contentious
contentious debate about the role of the protocol, and reflected a debate about the role of the protocol, and reflected a pretense that
pretense that this was an overlay only for P2PSIP. That is not this was an overlay only for P2PSIP. That is not really true in base
really true in base anymore (see last paragraph of introduction) and anymore (see last paragraph of introduction) and the language has
the language has been very much genericized in base. Should we make been very much genericized in base. Should we make this text more
this text more abstract and then use AoR->contact mapping as an abstract and then use AoR->contact mapping as an example of the
example of the (original) use? On a related note, see the last (original) use? On a related note, see the last paragraph of the
paragraph of the Background section -- do we want to reword this? Background section -- do we want to reword this?
At this point, the editors believe these additional two issues are
settled, but are left here for final debate on the document before
publication.
OPEN ISSUE: Should we include a section that documents previous OPEN ISSUE: Should we include a section that documents previous
decisions made, to preserve the historical debate and prevent past decisions made, to preserve the historical debate and prevent past
issues from being raised in the future, or simply rely on the mailing issues from being raised in the future, or simply rely on the mailing
list to address these concerns? list to address these concerns? (consensus seemed to be no)
OPEN ISSUE: Should we include the use cases from OPEN ISSUE: Should we include the use cases from
draft-bryan-p2psip-app-scenarios-00 (now long expired)? There was draft-bryan-p2psip-app-scenarios-00 (now long expired)? (consensus
some interest in doing so in previous versions, but no conclusion was seemed to be no)
reached.
8. Informative References 8. Informative References
[Chord] Singh, K., Stoica, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashock, [Chord] Singh, K., Stoica, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashock,
M., Dabek, F., and H. Balakrishman, "Chord: A scalable M., Dabek, F., and H. Balakrishman, "Chord: A scalable
peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications", peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications",
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Neworking Volume 11 Issue 1, pp. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Neworking Volume 11 Issue 1, pp.
17-32, Feb. 2003. 17-32, Feb. 2003.
Copy available at Copy available at
 End of changes. 13 change blocks. 
27 lines changed or deleted 35 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/