--- 1/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-app-id-vv-profiles-01.txt 2014-07-04 14:14:35.965917529 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-app-id-vv-profiles-02.txt 2014-07-04 14:14:35.997918315 -0700 @@ -1,20 +1,20 @@ Network WG James Polk Internet-Draft Subha Dhesikan -Expires: March 19, 2014 Cisco Systems -Intended Status: Standards Track September 19, 2013 +Expires: January 4, 2015 Cisco Systems +Intended Status: Standards Track July 4, 2014 Updates: RFC 2872 (if accepted) Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Application-ID Profiles for Voice and Video Streams - draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-app-id-vv-profiles-01 + draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-app-id-vv-profiles-02 Abstract RFC 2872 defines an Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) object for application identifiers. This document uses that App-ID and gives implementers specific guidelines for differing voice and video stream identifications to nodes along a reservation path, creating specific profiles for voice and video session identification. Status of this Memo @@ -25,41 +25,41 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on March 19, 2014. + This Internet-Draft will expire on July 4, 2014. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2. Application-ID Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2. RSVP Application-ID Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. The Voice and Video Application-ID Profiles . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1 The Broadcast video Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2 The Real-time Interactive Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3 The Multimedia Conferencing Profile . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4 The Multimedia Streaming Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.5 The Conversational Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1 Application Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1.1 Broadcast Profiles IANA Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 8 @@ -67,24 +67,20 @@ 5.1.3 Multimedia-Conferencing Profiles IANA Registry . . . . 9 5.1.4 Multimedia-Streaming Profiles IANA Registry . . . . . . 10 5.1.5 Conversational Profiles IANA Registry . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", - "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this - document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119]. - 1. Introduction RFC 2872 [RFC2872] describes the usage of policy elements for providing application information in Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) signaling [RFC2205]. The intention of providing this information is to enable application-based policy control. However, RFC 2872 does not enumerate any application profiles. The absence of explicit, uniform profiles leads to incompatible handling of these values and misapplied policies. An application profile used by a sender might not be understood by the intermediaries or receiver @@ -113,21 +109,27 @@ not allow the flexibility of having different domains choosing the DSCP value for the traffic classes that they maintain. How these labels indicate the appropriate Differentiated Services Codepoint (DSCP) is out of scope for this document. This document will break out each application type and propose how the values in application-id template should be populated for uniformity and interoperability. -2. Application ID Template +1.1 Terminology + + The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this + document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119]. + +2. RSVP Application ID Template The template from RFC 2872 is as follows: 0 1 2 3 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | PE Length (8) | P-type = AUTH_APP | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Attribute Length | A-type = | Sub-type = | | | POLICY_LOCATOR| ASCII_DN | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+