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/