draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-03.txt		draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-04.txt
	Speermint Working Group R. Penno		Speermint Working Group R. Penno
	Internet Draft Juniper Networks		Internet Draft Juniper Networks
	Intended status: Informational D. Malas		Intended status: Informational D. Malas
	Expires: September 2007 Level 3		Expires: January 2008 Level 3
	S. Khan		S. Khan
	Comcast		Comcast
	A. Uzelac		A. Uzelac
	Global Crossing		Global Crossing
	April 23, 2007		August 10, 2007
	SPEERMINT Peering Architecture		SPEERMINT Peering Architecture
	draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-03		draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-04
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that		By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that
	any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is		any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is
	aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she		aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she
	becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of		becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of
	BCP 79.		BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	skipping to change at page 1, line 39		skipping to change at page 1, line 39
	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."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
	This Internet-Draft will expire on October 23, 2007.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 2008.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).		Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines the SPEERMINT peering architecture, its		This document defines the SPEERMINT peering architecture, its
	functional components and peering interface functions.		functional components and peering interface functions. It also
			describes the steps taken to establish a session between two peering
			domains in the context of the functions defined.
	Conventions used in this document		Conventions used in this document
	In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
	server respectively.
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 Error!		document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119[1]
	Reference source not found..
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction...................................................3		1. Introduction...................................................3
	2. Network Context................................................3		2. Network Context................................................3
	3. Procedures.....................................................6		3. Procedures.....................................................6
	4. Reference SPEERMINT Architecture...............................6		4. Reference SPEERMINT Architecture...............................6
	5. Peer Function Examples.........................................7		5. Peer Function Examples.........................................8
	5.1. The Location Function (LF) of an Initiating Provider......8		5.1. The Location Function (LF) of an Initiating Provider......8
	5.1.1. Target address analysis..............................8		5.1.1. Target address analysis..............................8
	5.1.2. User ENUM Lookup.....................................9		5.1.2. User ENUM Lookup.....................................9
	5.1.3. Carrier ENUM lookup..................................9		5.1.3. Carrier ENUM lookup.................................10
	5.1.4. Routing Table........................................9		5.1.4. Routing Table.......................................10
	5.1.5. SIP DNS Resolution..................................10		5.1.5. SIP DNS Resolution..................................10
	5.1.6. SIP Redirect Server.................................10		5.1.6. SIP Redirect Server.................................11
	5.2. The Location Function (LF) of a Receiving Provider.......10		5.2. The Location Function (LF) of a Receiving Provider.......11
	5.2.1. Publish ENUM records................................10		5.2.1. Publish ENUM records................................11
	5.2.2. Publish SIP DNS records.............................10		5.2.2. Publish SIP DNS records.............................11
	5.2.3. TLS.................................................10		5.2.3. Subscribe Notify....................................11
	5.2.4. IPSec...............................................11
	5.2.5. Subscribe Notify....................................11
	5.3. Signaling Function (SF)..................................11		5.3. Signaling Function (SF)..................................11
	5.4. Media Function (MF)......................................12		5.4. The Signaling Function (SF) of an Initiating Provider....12
	5.5. Policy Considerations....................................12		5.4.1. Setup TLS connection................................12
	6. Call Control and Media Control Deployment Options.............13		5.4.2. IPSec...............................................12
	7. Address space considerations..................................15		5.4.3. Co-Location.........................................13
	8. Security Considerations.......................................15		5.4.4. Send the SIP request................................13
	9. IANA Considerations...........................................15		5.5. The Signaling Function (SF) of an Initiating Provider....14
	10. Acknowledgments..............................................15		5.5.1. Verify TLS connection...............................14
	11. References...................................................16		5.5.2. Receive SIP requests................................14
	11.1. Normative References....................................16		5.6. Media Function (MF)......................................15
	11.2. Informative References..................................16		5.7. Policy Considerations....................................15
	Author's Addresses...............................................18		6. Call Control and Media Control Deployment Options.............16
	Intellectual Property Statement..................................18		7. Address space considerations..................................18
	Disclaimer of Validity...........................................19		8. Security Considerations.......................................18
			9. IANA Considerations...........................................18
			10. Acknowledgments..............................................18
			11. References...................................................19
			11.1. Normative References....................................19
			11.2. Informative References..................................20
			Author's Addresses...............................................21
			Intellectual Property Statement..................................21
			Disclaimer of Validity...........................................22
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The objective of this document is to define a reference peering		The objective of this document is to define a reference peering
	architecture in the context of Session PEERing for Multimedia		architecture in the context of Session PEERing for Multimedia
	INTerconnect (SPEERMINT). In this process, we define the peering		INTerconnect (SPEERMINT). In this process, we define the peering
	reference architecture (reference, for short), its functional		reference architecture (reference, for short), it's functional
	components, and peering interface functions from the perspective of a		components, and peering interface functions from the perspective of a
	real-time communications (Voice and Multimedia) IP Service provider		real-time communications (Voice and Multimedia) IP Service provider
	network.		network.
	This architecture allows the interconnection of two service providers		This architecture allows the interconnection of two service providers
	in layer 5 peering as defined in the SPEERMINT Requirements [13] and		in layer 5 peering as defined in the SPEERMINT Requirements [13] and
	Terminology [12] documents for the purpose SIP-based voice and		Terminology [12] documents for the purpose SIP-based voice and
	multimedia traffic.		multimedia traffic.
	Layer 3 peering is outside the scope of this document. Hence, the		Layer 3 peering is outside the scope of this document. Hence, the
	skipping to change at page 6, line 33		skipping to change at page 6, line 33
	6. the session establishment,		6. the session establishment,
	7. the transfer of media,		7. the transfer of media,
	8. and the session termination.		8. and the session termination.
	4. Reference SPEERMINT Architecture		4. Reference SPEERMINT Architecture
	Figure 2 depicts the SPEERMINT architecture and logical functions		Figure 2 depicts the SPEERMINT architecture and logical functions
	that form the peering between two SIP service providers I and R,		that form the peering between two SIP service providers.
	where I is the Initiating peer and R is the Receiving peer.
	+------+		+------+
	| DNS, |		| DNS, |
	| Db, |		+---------| Db, |---------+
	| etc |		| | etc | |
	------- +------+ -------		| +------+ |
	/ \ | | / \		| |
	| LF---+ +---LF |		--------------- ---------------
			/ \ / \
	| | | |		| | | |
	| SIP SF----------SF SIP |		| | | |
	| Service | | Service |		| +------+ | | +------+ |
	|Provider MF----------MF Provider|		| | DNS, | | | | DNS, | |
	| I | | R |		| | Db, | | | | Db, | |
			| | etc | | | | etc | |
			| +------+ | | +------+ |
			| | | |
			| | | |
			| +---SF--+ +---SF--+ |
			| | | | | |
			| | SBE | | SBE | |
			| Originating | | | | Terminating |
			| +---SF--+ +---SF--+ |
			| Domain | | Domain |
			| +---MF--+ +---MF--+ |
			| SSP | | | | SSP |
			| | DBE | | DBE | |
			| | | | | |
			| +---MF--+ +---MF--+ |
			| | | |
			| +----LF---+ +----LF---+ |
			| +-LF--|----+ | | +----|--LS-+ |
			| | | | | | | | | |
			| | SM | | LS | | LS | | SM | |
			| | | | | | | | | |
			| | +----|----+ +----|----+ | |
			| +----------+| |+----------+ |
	| | | |		| | | |
	| | | |		| | | |
	\ / \ /		\ / \ /
	------- -------		--------------- ---------------
	Figure 2: Reference SPEERMINT Architecture		Figure 2: Reference SPEERMINT Architecture
	The procedures presented in Chapter 3 are implemented by a set of		The procedures presented in Chapter 3 are implemented by a set of
	peering functions:		peering functions:
	o Location Function (LF): Purpose is to develop call routing data		o Location Function (LF): Purpose is to develop Session
	(CRD) by discovering the Signaling Function (SF), , and end		Establishment Data (SED) by discovering the Signaling Function
	user's reachable host (IP address and port).		(SF) and the end user's reachable host (IP address and port). The
			location function is distributed across the Location Server (LS)
			and Session Manager (SM).
	o Signaling Function (SF): Purpose is to perform routing of SIP		o Signaling Function (SF): Purpose is to perform SIP call routing,
	messages, to optionally perform termination and re-initiation of		to optionally perform termination and re-initiation of call, to
	call, to optionally implement security and policies on SIP		optionally implement security and policies on SIP messages, and to
	messages, and to assist in discovery/exchange of parameters to be		assist in discovery/exchange of parameters to be used by the Media
	used by the Media Function (MF).		Function (MF). The signaling function is located within the
			Signaling Path Border Element (SBE)
	o Media Function (MF): Purpose is to perform media related function		o Media Function (MF): Purpose is to perform media related function
	such as media transcoding and media security implementation		such as media transcoding and media security implementation
	between two SIP providers.		between two SIP providers. The media function is located within
			the Data Path Border Element (DBE).
	The intention of defining these functions is to provide a framework		The intention of defining these functions is to provide a framework
	for design segmentation and allow each one to evolve separately.		for design segmentation and allow each one to evolve separately.
	5. Peer Function Examples		5. Peer Function Examples
	This section describes the peering functions in more detail and		This section describes the peering functions in more detail and
	provides some examples on the role they would play in a SIP call in a		provides some examples on the role they would play in a SIP call in a
	Layer 5 peering scenario.		Layer 5 peering scenario.
	Some of the information in the chapter is taken from [14].		Some of the information in the chapter is taken from [14].
	5.1. The Location Function (LF) of an Initiating Provider		5.1. The Location Function (LF) of an Initiating Provider
	Purpose is to develop call routing data (CRD) [12] by discovering		Purpose is to develop Session Establishment Data (SED) [12] by
	the Signaling Function (SF), and end user's reachable host (IP		discovering the Signaling Function (SF), and end user's reachable
	address and host). The LF of an Initiating provider analyzes target		host (IP address and host). The LF of an Initiating provider analyzes
	address and discovers the next hop signaling function (SF) in a		target address and discovers the next hop signaling function (SF) in
	peering relationship using DNS, SIP Redirect Server, or a functional		a peering relationship using DNS, SIP Redirect Server, or a
	equivalent database.		functional equivalent database.
	5.1.1. Target address analysis		5.1.1. Target address analysis
	When the initiating provider receives a request to communicate, the		When the initiating provider receives a request to communicate, the
	initiating provider analyzes the target state data to determine		initiating provider analyzes the target state data to determine
	whether the call needs to be terminated internal or external to its		whether the call needs to be terminated internal or external to its
	network. The analysis method is internal to the provider's policy;		network. The analysis method is internal to the provider's policy;
	thus, outside the scope of SPEERMINT. Note that the peer is free to		thus, outside the scope of SPEERMINT. Note that the peer is free to
	consult any manner of private data sources to make this		consult any manner of private data sources to make this
	determination.		determination.
	If the target address does not represent a resource inside the		If the target address does not represent a resource inside the
	initiating peer's administrative domain or federation of domains, the		initiating peer's administrative domain or federation of domains, the
	skipping to change at page 10, line 11		skipping to change at page 10, line 38
	the initiating peer MAY still sends the call to another provider for		the initiating peer MAY still sends the call to another provider for
	PSTN gateway termination by prior arrangement using a routing table.		PSTN gateway termination by prior arrangement using a routing table.
	If so, the initiating peer rewrites the Request-URI to address the		If so, the initiating peer rewrites the Request-URI to address the
	gateway resource in the target provider's domain and MAY forward the		gateway resource in the target provider's domain and MAY forward the
	request on to that provider using the procedures described in the		request on to that provider using the procedures described in the
	remainder of these steps.		remainder of these steps.
	5.1.5. SIP DNS Resolution		5.1.5. SIP DNS Resolution
	Once a sip: or sips: in an external domain is selected as the target,		Once a sip: or sips: in an external domain is selected as the target,
	the initiating peer uses the procedures described in [4] Section 4.		the initiating peer MAY apply local policy to decide whether
	To summarize the RFC 3263 procedure: unless these are explicitly		forwarding requests to the target domain is acceptable. If so, the
	encoded in the target URI, a transport is chosen using NAPTR records,		initiating peer uses the procedures in RFC 3263 [6] Section 4 to
	a port is chosen using SRV records, and an address is chosen using A		determine how to contact the receiving peer. To summarize the RFC
	or AAAA records. Note that these are queries of records in the		3263 procedure: unless these are explicitly encoded in the target
	global DNS.		URI, a transport is chosen using NAPTR records, a port is chosen
			using SRV records, and an address is chosen using A or AAAA records.
			Note that these are queries of records in the global DNS.
			When communicating with a public external peer, entities compliant to
			this document MUST only select a TLS-protected transport for
			communication from the initiating peer to the receiving peer. Note
			that this is a single-hop requirement. Either peer MAY insist on
			using a sips: URI which asserts that each hop is TLS-protected, but
			this document does not require protection over each hop.
	5.1.6. SIP Redirect Server		5.1.6. SIP Redirect Server
	A SIP Redirect Server may help in resolving current address of a		A SIP Redirect Server may help in resolving current address of a
	mobile target address.		mobile target address.
	5.2. The Location Function (LF) of a Receiving Provider		5.2. The Location Function (LF) of a Receiving Provider
	5.2.1. Publish ENUM records		5.2.1. Publish ENUM records
	skipping to change at page 10, line 41		skipping to change at page 11, line 35
	accept traffic from specific initiating peers, it MAY still reject		accept traffic from specific initiating peers, it MAY still reject
	requests on a case-by-case basis.		requests on a case-by-case basis.
	5.2.2. Publish SIP DNS records		5.2.2. Publish SIP DNS records
	To receive peer requests, the receiving peer MUST insure that it		To receive peer requests, the receiving peer MUST insure that it
	publishes appropriate NAPTR, SRV, and address (A and/or AAAA) records		publishes appropriate NAPTR, SRV, and address (A and/or AAAA) records
	in the global DNS that resolve an appropriate transport, port, and		in the global DNS that resolve an appropriate transport, port, and
	address to a relevant SIP server.		address to a relevant SIP server.
	5.2.3. TLS		5.2.3. Subscribe Notify
	Once a transport, port, and address are found, the initiating peer
	will open or find a reusable TLS connection to the peer. The
	initiating provider should verify the server certificate which should
	be rooted in a well-known certificate authority. The initiating
	provider should be prepared to provide a TLS client certificate upon
	request during the TLS handshake. The client certificate should
	contain a DNS or URI choice type in the subject AltName which
	corresponds to the domain asserted in the host production of the From
	header URI. The certificate should be valid and rooted in a well-
	known certificate authority. Note that the client certificate MAY
	contain a list of entries in the subjectAltName, only one of which
	has to match the domain in the From header URI.
	When the receiving peer receives a TLS client hello, it responds with
	its certificate. The receiving peer certificate SHOULD be valid and
	rooted in a well-known certificate authority. The receiving peer
	should request and verify the client certificate during the TLS
	handshake.
	5.2.4. IPSec
	Editor's Note: will be described later.
	5.2.5. Subscribe Notify
	Policy function may also be optionally implemented by dynamic		Policy function may also be optionally implemented by dynamic
	subscribe, notify, and exchange of policy information and feature		subscribe, notify, and exchange of policy information and feature
	information among providers [22].		information among providers [22].
	5.3. Signaling Function (SF)		5.3. Signaling Function (SF)
	The purpose of signaling function is to perform routing of SIP		The purpose of signaling function is to perform routing of SIP
	messages, to optionally perform termination and re-initiation of a		messages, to optionally perform termination and re-initiation of a
	call, to optionally implement security and policies on SIP messages,		call, to optionally implement security and policies on SIP messages,
	skipping to change at page 12, line 11		skipping to change at page 12, line 21
	Admission Control, SIP Denial of Service protection, SIP Topology		Admission Control, SIP Denial of Service protection, SIP Topology
	Hiding, SIP header normalization, and SIP security, privacy and		Hiding, SIP header normalization, and SIP security, privacy and
	encryption.		encryption.
	The signaling function can also process SDP payloads for media		The signaling function can also process SDP payloads for media
	information such as media type, bandwidth, and type of codec; then,		information such as media type, bandwidth, and type of codec; then,
	communicate this information to the media function. Signaling		communicate this information to the media function. Signaling
	function may optionally communicate with network layer to pass Layer		function may optionally communicate with network layer to pass Layer
	3 related policies [10]		3 related policies [10]
	5.4. Media Function (MF)		5.4. The Signaling Function (SF) of an Initiating Provider
			5.4.1. Setup TLS connection
			Once a transport, port, and address are found, the initiating peer
			will open or find a reusable TLS connection to the peer. The
			initiating provider MUST verify the server certificate which SHOULD
			be rooted in a well-known certificate authority. The initiating
			provider MUST be prepared to provide a TLS client certificate upon
			request during the TLS handshake. The client certificate MUST
			contain a DNS or URI choice type in the subjectAltName which
			corresponds to the domain asserted in the host production of the From
			header URI. The certificate SHOULD be valid and rooted in a well-
			known certificate authority.
			Note that the client certificate MAY contain a list of entries in the
			subjectAltName, only one of which has to match the domain in the From
			header URI.
			5.4.2. IPSec
			In certain deployments the use of IPSec between the signaling
			functions of the originating and terminating domains can be used as a
			security mechanism instead of TLS.
			5.4.3. Co-Location
			In this scenario the signaling functions are co-located in a
			physically secure location and/or are members of a segregated
			network. In this case messages between the originating and
			terminating domains would be sent as clear text.
			5.4.4. Send the SIP request
			Once a TLS connection between the peers is established, the
			initiating peer sends the request. When sending some requests, the
			initiating peer MUST verify and assert the senders identity using the
			SIP Identity mechanism.
			The domain name in the URI of the From: header MUST be a domain which
			was present in the certificate presented when establishing the TLS
			connection for this request, even if the user part has an anonymous
			value. If the From header contains the user URI parameter with the
			value of "phone", the user part of the From header URI MUST be a
			complete and valid tel: URI [9] telephone-subscriber production, and
			SHOULD be a global-number. For example, the following are all
			acceptable, the first three are encouraged:
			From: "John Doe" <john.doe@example.net>
			From: "+12125551212" <+12125551212@example.net;user=phone>
			From: "Anonymous" <anonymous@example.net>
			From: <4092;phone-context=+12125554000@example.net;user=phone>
			From: "5551212" <5551212@example.net>
			The following are not acceptable:
			From: "2125551212" <2125551212@example.net;user=phone>
			From: "Anonymous" <anonymous@anonymous.invalid>
			In addition, for new dialog-forming requests and non-dialog-forming
			requests, the request MUST contain a valid Identity and Identity-Info
			header as described in [12]. The Identity-Info header must present a
			domain name which is represented in the certificate presented when
			establishing the TLS connection over which the request is sent. The
			initiating peer SHOULD include an Identity header on in-dialog
			requests as well, if the From header field value matches an identity
			the initiating peer is willing to assert.
			The initiating peer MAY include any SIP option-tags in Supported,
			Require, or Proxy-Require headers according to procedures in
			standards-track SIP extensions. Note however that the initiating
			peer MUST be prepared to fallback to baseline SIP functionality as
			defined by the mandatory-to-implement features of RFC 3261, RFC 3263,
			and RFC 3264 [7], except that peers implementing this specification
			MUST implement SIP over TLS using the sip: URI scheme, the SIP
			Identity header, and RFC 4320 [10] non-INVITE transaction fixes.
			5.5. The Signaling Function (SF) of an Initiating Provider
			5.5.1. Verify TLS connection
			When the receiving peer receives a TLS client hello, it responds with
			its certificate. The receiving peer certificate SHOULD be valid and
			rooted in a well-known certificate authority. The receiving peer
			MUST request and verify the client certificate during the TLS
			handshake.
			Once the initiating peer has been authenticated, the receiving peer
			can authorize communication from this peer based on the domain name
			of the peer and the root of its certificate. This allows two
			authorization models to be used, together or separately. In the
			domain-based model, the receiving peer can allow communication from
			peers with some trusted administrative domains which use general-
			purpose certificate authorities, without explicitly permitting all
			domains with certificates rooted in the same authority. It also
			allows a certificate authority (CA) based model where every domain
			with a valid certificate rooted in some list of CAs is automatically
			authorized.
			5.5.2. Receive SIP requests
			Once a TLS connection is established, the receiving peer is prepared
			to receive incoming SIP requests. For new dialog-forming requests
			and out-of-dialog requests, the receiving peer verifies that the
			target (request-URI) is a domain which for which it is responsible.
			(For these requests, there should be no remaining Route header field
			values.) Next the receiving verifies that the Identity header is
			valid, corresponds to the message, corresponds to the Identity-Info
			header, and that the domain in the From header corresponds to one of
			the domains in the TLS client certificate.
			For in-dialog requests, the receiving peer can verify that it
			corresponds to the top-most Route header field value. The peer also
			validates any Identity header if present.
			The receiving peer MAY reject incoming requests due to local policy.
			When a request is rejected because the initiating peer is not
			authorized to peer, the receiving peer SHOULD respond with a 403
			response with the reason phrase "Unsupported Peer".
			5.6. Media Function (MF)
	Examples of the media function is to transform voice payload from one		Examples of the media function is to transform voice payload from one
	coding (e.g., G.711) to another (e.g., EvRC), media relaying, media		coding (e.g., G.711) to another (e.g., EvRC), media relaying, media
	security, privacy, and encryption.		security, privacy, and encryption.
	Editor's Note: This section will be further updated.		Editor's Note: This section will be further updated.
	5.5. Policy Considerations		5.7. Policy Considerations
	In the context of the SPEERMINT working group when two Layer 5		In the context of the SPEERMINT working group when two Layer 5
	devices (e.g., SIP Proxies) peer, there is a need to exchange peering		devices (e.g., SIP Proxies) peer, there is a need to exchange peering
	policy information. There are specifications in progress in the		policy information. There are specifications in progress in the
	SIPPING working group to define policy exchange between an UA and a		SIPPING working group to define policy exchange between an UA and a
	domain [23] and providing profile data to SIP user agents [24] These		domain [23] and providing profile data to SIP user agents [24] These
	considerations borrow from both.		considerations borrow from both.
	Following the terminology introduced in [12], this package uses the		Following the terminology introduced in [12], this package uses the
	terms Peering Session-Independent and Session-Specific policies in		terms Peering Session-Independent and Session-Specific policies in
	skipping to change at page 16, line 24		skipping to change at page 19, line 24
	[3] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A.,		[3] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A.,
	Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP:		Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP:
	Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.		Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
	[4] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation Protocol		[4] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation Protocol
	(SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263, June 2002.		(SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263, June 2002.
	[5] Blake-Wilson, S., Nystrom, M., Hopwood, D., Mikkelsen, J., and		[5] Blake-Wilson, S., Nystrom, M., Hopwood, D., Mikkelsen, J., and
	T. Wright, "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions", RFC		T. Wright, "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions", RFC
	3546, June 2003.		4366, April 2006.
	[6] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson,		[6] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson,
	"RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64,		"RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64,
	RFC 3550, July 2003.		RFC 3550, July 2003.
	[7] Peterson, J., Liu, H., Yu, J., and B. Campbell, "Using E.164		[7] Peterson, J., Liu, H., Yu, J., and B. Campbell, "Using E.164
	numbers with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3824,		numbers with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3824,
	June 2004.		June 2004.
	[8] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and		[8] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and
	skipping to change at page 16, line 47		skipping to change at page 19, line 47
	[9] Peterson, J., "Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service		[9] Peterson, J., "Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service
	Registration for Presence Services", RFC 3953, January 2005.		Registration for Presence Services", RFC 3953, January 2005.
	[10] ETSI TS 102 333: " Telecommunications and Internet converged		[10] ETSI TS 102 333: " Telecommunications and Internet converged
	Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); Gate		Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); Gate
	control protocol".		control protocol".
	[11] Peterson, J., "enumservice registration for Session Initiation		[11] Peterson, J., "enumservice registration for Session Initiation
	Protocol (SIP) Addresses-of-Record", RFC 3764, April 2004.		Protocol (SIP) Addresses-of-Record", RFC 3764, April 2004.
			[12] Livingood, J. and R. Shockey, "IANA Registration for an
			Enumservice Containing PSTN Signaling Information", RFC 4769,
			November 2006.
	11.2. Informative References		11.2. Informative References
	[12] Meyer, D., "SPEERMINT Terminology", draft-ietf-speermint-		[13] Meyer, D., "SPEERMINT Terminology", draft-ietf-speermint-
	terminology-04 (work in progress), May 2006.		terminology-08 (work in progress), Junly 2007.
	[13] Mule, J-F., "SPEERMINT Requirements for SIP-based VoIP		[14] Mule, J-F., "SPEERMINT Requirements for SIP-based VoIP
	Interconnection", draft-ietf-speermint-requirements-00.txt,		Interconnection", draft-ietf-speermint-requirements-02.txt,
	June 2006.		July 2007.
	[14] Mahy, R., "A Minimalist Approach to Direct Peering", draft-		[15] Mahy, R., "A Minimalist Approach to Direct Peering", draft-
	mahy-speermint-direct-peering-00.txt, June 19, 2006.		mahy-speermint-direct-peering-02.txt, July 2007.
	[15] Penno, R., et al., "SPEERMINT Routing Architecture Message		[16] Penno, R., et al., "SPEERMINT Routing Architecture Message
	Flows", draft-ietf-speermint-flows-02.txt", April 2007.		Flows", draft-ietf-speermint-flows-02.txt", April 2007.
	[16] Lee, Y., "Session Peering Use Case for Cable", draft-lee-		[17] Lee, Y., "Session Peering Use Case for Cable", draft-lee-
	speermint-use-case-cable-00.txt, June, 2006.		speermint-use-case-cable-01.txt, June, 2006.
	[17] Houri, A., et al., "RTC Provisioning Requirements", draft-		[18] Houri, A., et al., "RTC Provisioning Requirements", draft-
	houri-speermint-rtc-provisioning-reqs-00.txt, June, 2006.		houri-speermint-rtc-provisioning-reqs-00.txt, June, 2006.
	[18] Habler, M., et al., "A Federation based VOIP Peering		[19] Habler, M., et al., "A Federation based VOIP Peering
	Architecture", draft-lendl-speermint-federations-03.txt,		Architecture", draft-lendl-speermint-federations-03.txt,
	September 2006.		September 2006.
	[19] Mahy, R., "A Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service		[20] Mahy, R., "A Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service
	Registration for Instant Messaging (IM) Services", draft-ietf-		Registration for Instant Messaging (IM) Services", draft-ietf-
	enum-im-service-00 (work in progress), March 2006.		enum-im-service-03 (work in progress), March 2006.
	[20] Haberler, M. and R. Stastny, "Combined User and Carrier ENUM in		[21] Haberler, M. and R. Stastny, "Combined User and Carrier ENUM in
	the e164.arpa tree", draft-haberler-carrier-enum-02 (work in		the e164.arpa tree", draft-haberler-carrier-enum-03 (work in
	progress), March 2006.		progress), March 2006.
	[21] Livingood, J. and R. Shockey, "IANA Registration for an
	Enumservice Containing PSTN Signaling Information", draft-ietf-
	enum-pstn-04 (work in progress), May 2006.
	[22] Penno, R., Malas D., and Melampy, P., "A Session Initiation		[22] Penno, R., Malas D., and Melampy, P., "A Session Initiation
	Protocol (SIP) Event package for Peering", draft-penno-sipping-		Protocol (SIP) Event package for Peering", draft-penno-sipping-
	peering-package-00 (work in progress), September 2006.		peering-package-00 (work in progress), September 2006.
	[23] Hollander, D., Bray, T., and A. Layman, "Namespaces in XML",		[23] Hollander, D., Bray, T., and A. Layman, "Namespaces in XML",
	W3C REC REC-xml-names-19990114, January 1999.		W3C REC REC-xml-names-19990114, January 1999.
	[24] Burger, E (Ed.), "A Mechanism for Content Indirection in		[24] Burger, E (Ed.), "A Mechanism for Content Indirection in
	Author's Addresses		Author's Addresses
End of changes. 38 change blocks.
	117 lines changed or deleted		251 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/