draft-ietf-sipcore-reason-q850-loc-05.txt   draft-ietf-sipcore-reason-q850-loc-06.txt 
Sipcore R. Jesske Sipcore R. Jesske
Internet-Draft Deutsche Telekom Internet-Draft Deutsche Telekom
Updates: 3326 (if approved) January 16, 2019 Updates: 3326 (if approved) February 21, 2019
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: July 20, 2019 Expires: August 25, 2019
ISUP Cause Location Parameter for the SIP Reason Header Field ISUP Cause Location Parameter for the SIP Reason Header Field
draft-ietf-sipcore-reason-q850-loc-05.txt draft-ietf-sipcore-reason-q850-loc-06.txt
Abstract Abstract
The SIP Reason header field is defined for carrying ISDN User Part The SIP Reason header field is defined for carrying ISDN User Part
(ISUP) cause values as well as SIP response codes. Some services in (ISUP) cause values as well as SIP response codes. Some services in
SIP networks may need to know the ISUP location where the call was SIP networks may need to know the ISUP location where the call was
released in the PSTN network to correctly interpret the reason of released in the PSTN network to correctly interpret the reason of
release. This document will update [RFC3326]. release. This document will update RFC3326.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 July 20, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://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
skipping to change at page 2, line 16 skipping to change at page 2, line 16
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Registration of location Parameter for Reason header 8.1. Registration of location Parameter for Reason header
field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The SIP Reason header field specification [RFC3326] describes a SIP The SIP Reason header field specification [RFC3326] describes a SIP
header field that is used to indicate that a SIP request is carrying header field that is used to indicate that a SIP request is carrying
skipping to change at page 3, line 11 skipping to change at page 3, line 11
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
3. Rationale 3. Rationale
The primary intent of the parameter defined in this specification is The primary intent of the parameter defined in this specification is
for use in IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) networks defined by 3GPP but for use in IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) networks defined by 3GPP but
also open to be used by any other network. The purpose of this also open to be used by any other network that includes ISUP
parameter is to transport the location of call release from the interworking gateways and uses Q.850 reason codes. The purpose of
this parameter is to transport the location of call release from the
originating PSTN entity to the SIP entity receiving the response or originating PSTN entity to the SIP entity receiving the response or
BYE message containing the location of the call release. The ISDN BYE message containing the location of the call release. The ISDN
location is defined in [Q.850]. location is defined in [Q.850].
4. Mechanism 4. Mechanism
As defined by [RFC3326] a Reason header field MAY appear in any As defined by [RFC3326] a Reason header field MAY appear in any
request in a dialog, in any CANCEL request and in any response whose request in a dialog, in any CANCEL request and in any response whose
status code explicitly allows the presence of this header field. The status code explicitly allows the presence of this header field. The
syntax of the header field follows the standard SIP parameter syntax. syntax of the header field follows the standard SIP parameter syntax.
skipping to change at page 5, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 22
location=LN location=LN
Content-Length: 0 Content-Length: 0
Figure 2: Example Location in Reason header field. Figure 2: Example Location in Reason header field.
6. Privacy Considerations 6. Privacy Considerations
While the addition of the location parameter does provide an While the addition of the location parameter does provide an
indicator of the entity that added the location in the signaling path indicator of the entity that added the location in the signaling path
this provides little more exposure than the [Q.850] cause itself. this provides little more exposure than the [Q.850] cause itself.
When applying privacy according to [RFC3323] the location value will The ISUP location value itself will not reveal the identity of the
not give any hint to the identity originating or terminating party of originating or terminating party of the call. It shows only the ISUP
the call. It shows only the location of the release of the call network location of the device that released the call. The ISUP
which maybe the end device itself (location user) or any other location does not show show the physical location of the caller or
network part. The location is even not showing from which city or callee.
town the call is coming from.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
This document doesn't change any of the security considerations This document doesn't change any of the security considerations
described in [RFC3326]. The addition of the location parameter does described in [RFC3326]. The addition of the location parameter does
provide an indicator of the [Q.850] location where the call was provide an indicator of the [Q.850] location where the call was
released within the PSTN. This information may be used for specific released within the PSTN. This information may be used for specific
location driven services but does not create any additional security location driven services but does not create any additional security
constrains. But since the [Q.850] location is very imprecise the constrains. But since the [Q.850] location is very imprecise the
[Q.850] location value itself will not add any major security [Q.850] location value itself will not add any major security
constraint. The use of this parameter is not restricted to a constraint. The use of this parameter is not restricted to a
specific architecture. specific architecture.
[RFC3398] does an extensive security consideration due to [RFC3398] describes detailed security consideration due to
interworking between ISUP and SIP. Beyond these considerations the interworking between ISUP and SIP. Beyond these considerations the
addition of the location does not add additional security concerns. addition of the location does not add additional security concerns.
The location shows the network part where the call is released. The location shows the network part where the call is released.
Knowing this does not increase the possibilities of extended fraud Knowing this does not increase the possibilities of extended fraud
scenarios. scenarios.
8. IANA Considerations 8. IANA Considerations
8.1. Registration of location Parameter for Reason header field 8.1. Registration of location Parameter for Reason header field
This document calls for IANA to register a new SIP header parameter This document calls for IANA to register a new SIP header parameter
as per the guidelines in [RFC3968], which will be added to Header as per the guidelines in [RFC3968], which will be added to Header
Field Parameters sub-registry under http://www.iana.org/assignments/ Field Parameters sub-registry under http://www.iana.org/assignments/
sip-parameters. sip-parameters.
Header Field: Reason Header Field: Reason
Parameter Name: location Parameter Name: location
skipping to change at page 7, line 27 skipping to change at page 7, line 27
(IANA) Header Field Parameter Registry for the Session (IANA) Header Field Parameter Registry for the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP)", BCP 98, RFC 3968, Initiation Protocol (SIP)", BCP 98, RFC 3968,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3968, December 2004, DOI 10.17487/RFC3968, December 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3968>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3968>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
Author's Address Author's Address
Roland Jesske Roland Jesske
Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom
Heinrich-Hertz Str, 3-7 Heinrich-Hertz Str, 3-7
Darmstadt 64295 Darmstadt 64295
Germany Germany
Email: r.jesske@telekom.de Email: r.jesske@telekom.de
URI: www.telekom.de URI: www.telekom.de
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
16 lines changed or deleted 19 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/