SIP
SIP (Session Initiation Protocol): call signalling, extensions, deployment
Within this page
SIP subjects:
SIP RFCs (300)
RFC 10006: Automatic SIP Trunking and Peering
Proposed Standard- K. Inamdar
- S. Narayanan
- C. Jennings
- August 2026
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies a framework that enables enterprise telephony
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks to solicit and obtain a
capability set document from a SIP service provider. The capability
set document encodes a set of characteristics that enable easy
peering between enterprise and service provider SIP networks.
Abstract
This document specifies a framework that enables enterprise telephony
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks to solicit and obtain a
capability set document from a SIP service provider. The capability
set document encodes a set of characteristics that enable easy
peering between enterprise and service provider SIP networks.
RFC 9996: Media Types for Protocol Buffers
Informational- M. Kucherawy
- W. Kumari
- R. Sloan
- July 2026
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document registers media types for Protocol Buffers, a common
extensible mechanism for serializing structured data.
Abstract
This document registers media types for Protocol Buffers, a common
extensible mechanism for serializing structured data.
RFC 9878: Updates to Private Header (P-Header) Extension Usage in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Requests and Responses
Informational- C. Holmberg
- N. Biondic
- G. Salgueiro
- R. Jesske
- November 2025
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has identified cases where different SIP private header extensions referred to as "P-" header fields, and defined in RFC 7315, need to be included in SIP requests and responses where they were not allowed according to RFC 7315. This document updates RFC 7315, in order to allow inclusion of the affected "P-" header fields in such requests and responses. This document obsoletes RFC 7976. The changes related to RFC 7976 involve the inclusion of the P-Visited-Network-ID header field in SIP responses.
This document also makes updates to RFC 7315 in order to fix misalignments that occurred when RFC 3455 was obsoleted by RFC 7315.
Abstract
The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has identified cases where different SIP private header extensions referred to as "P-" header fields, and defined in RFC 7315, need to be included in SIP requests and responses where they were not allowed according to RFC 7315. This document updates RFC 7315, in order to allow inclusion of the affected "P-" header fields in such requests and responses. This document obsoletes RFC 7976. The changes related to RFC 7976 involve the inclusion of the P-Visited-Network-ID header field in SIP responses.
This document also makes updates to RFC 7315 in order to fix misalignments that occurred when RFC 3455 was obsoleted by RFC 7315.
RFC 9796: SIP Call-Info Parameters for Rich Call Data
Proposed Standard- C. Wendt
- J. Peterson
- July 2025
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies a usage of the SIP Call-Info header field that incorporates Rich Call Data (RCD) associated with the identity of the originating party in order to provide to the terminating party a description of the caller (including details about the reason for the session). RCD includes information about the caller beyond the telephone number (such as a calling name, logo, photo, or jCard object representing the caller), which can help the called party decide how to handle the session request.
This document defines three new parameters 'call-reason', 'verified', and 'integrity' for the SIP Call-Info header field and also a new token ("jcard") for the 'purpose' parameter of the Call-Info header field. It also provides guidance on the use of the Call-Info 'purpose' parameter token, "icon".
Abstract
This document specifies a usage of the SIP Call-Info header field that incorporates Rich Call Data (RCD) associated with the identity of the originating party in order to provide to the terminating party a description of the caller (including details about the reason for the session). RCD includes information about the caller beyond the telephone number (such as a calling name, logo, photo, or jCard object representing the caller), which can help the called party decide how to handle the session request.
This document defines three new parameters 'call-reason', 'verified', and 'integrity' for the SIP Call-Info header field and also a new token ("jcard") for the 'purpose' parameter of the Call-Info header field. It also provides guidance on the use of the Call-Info 'purpose' parameter token, "icon".
RFC 9806: Updates to SIP-Based Media Recording (SIPREC) to Correct Metadata Media Type
Proposed Standard- D. Mongrain
- June 2025
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The SIP-based Media Recording (SIPREC) protocol is defined by both "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Recording Metadata" (RFC 7865) and "Session Recording Protocol" (RFC 7866). Unfortunately, both RFCs contradict each other regarding how recording metadata is to be labeled. In addition, neither RFC registered the new media type. This document updates RFC 7866 to align with RFC 7865 when labeling recording metadata and also registers the media type.
Abstract
The SIP-based Media Recording (SIPREC) protocol is defined by both "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Recording Metadata" (RFC 7865) and "Session Recording Protocol" (RFC 7866). Unfortunately, both RFCs contradict each other regarding how recording metadata is to be labeled. In addition, neither RFC registered the new media type. This document updates RFC 7866 to align with RFC 7865 when labeling recording metadata and also registers the media type.
RFC 9409: The 'sip-trunking-capability' Link Relation Type
Informational- K. Inamdar
- S. Narayanan
- D. Engi
- G. Salgueiro
- July 2023
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This Informational document defines the 'sip-trunking-capability'
link relation type that may be used by an enterprise telephony
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) network to retrieve a SIP trunking
capability set document, which contains the capabilities and
configuration requirements of an Internet Telephony Service Provider
(ITSP). These technical requirements allow for seamless peering
between SIP-based enterprise telephony networks and the ITSP.
Abstract
This Informational document defines the 'sip-trunking-capability'
link relation type that may be used by an enterprise telephony
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) network to retrieve a SIP trunking
capability set document, which contains the capabilities and
configuration requirements of an Internet Telephony Service Provider
(ITSP). These technical requirements allow for seamless peering
between SIP-based enterprise telephony networks and the ITSP.
RFC 9366: Multiple SIP Reason Header Field Values
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- March 2023
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The SIP Reason header field as defined in RFC 3326 allows only one Reason value per protocol value. Experience with more recently defined protocols shows it is useful to allow multiple values with the same protocol value. This document updates RFC 3326 to allow multiple values for an indicated registered protocol when that protocol defines what the presence of multiple values means.
Abstract
The SIP Reason header field as defined in RFC 3326 allows only one Reason value per protocol value. Experience with more recently defined protocols shows it is useful to allow multiple values with the same protocol value. This document updates RFC 3326 to allow multiple values for an indicated registered protocol when that protocol defines what the presence of multiple values means.
RFC 9248: Interoperability Profile for Relay User Equipment
Proposed Standard- B. Rosen
- June 2022
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Video Relay Service (VRS) is a term used to describe a method by which a hearing person can communicate with a sign language speaker who is deaf, deafblind, or hard of hearing (HoH) or has a speech disability using an interpreter (i.e., a Communications Assistant (CA)) connected via a videophone to the sign language speaker and an audio telephone call to the hearing user. The CA interprets using sign language on the videophone link and voice on the telephone link. Often the interpreters may be employed by a company or agency, termed a "provider" in this document. The provider also provides a video service that allows users to connect video devices to their service and subsequently to CAs and other sign language speakers. It is desirable that the videophones used by the sign language speaker conform to a standard so that any device may be used with any provider and that direct video calls between sign language speakers work. This document describes the interface between a videophone and a provider.
Abstract
Video Relay Service (VRS) is a term used to describe a method by which a hearing person can communicate with a sign language speaker who is deaf, deafblind, or hard of hearing (HoH) or has a speech disability using an interpreter (i.e., a Communications Assistant (CA)) connected via a videophone to the sign language speaker and an audio telephone call to the hearing user. The CA interprets using sign language on the videophone link and voice on the telephone link. Often the interpreters may be employed by a company or agency, termed a "provider" in this document. The provider also provides a video service that allows users to connect video devices to their service and subsequently to CAs and other sign language speakers. It is desirable that the videophones used by the sign language speaker conform to a standard so that any device may be used with any provider and that direct video calls between sign language speakers work. This document describes the interface between a videophone and a provider.
RFC 9239: Updates to ECMAScript Media Types
Informational- M. Miller
- M. Borins
- M. Bynens
- B. Farias
- May 2022
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes the registration of media types for the ECMAScript and JavaScript programming languages and conformance requirements for implementations of these types. This document obsoletes RFC 4329 ("Scripting Media Types)", replacing the previous registrations with information and requirements aligned with common usage and implementation experiences.
Abstract
This document describes the registration of media types for the ECMAScript and JavaScript programming languages and conformance requirements for implementations of these types. This document obsoletes RFC 4329 ("Scripting Media Types)", replacing the previous registrations with information and requirements aligned with common usage and implementation experiences.
RFC 9071: RTP-Mixer Formatting of Multiparty Real-Time Text
Proposed Standard- G. Hellström
- July 2021
- IETF publication
- Web and Internet Transport
Abstract
This document provides enhancements of real-time text (as specified in RFC 4103) suitable for mixing in a centralized conference model, enabling source identification and rapidly interleaved transmission of text from different sources. The intended use is for real-time text mixers and participant endpoints capable of providing an efficient presentation or other treatment of a multiparty real-time text session. The specified mechanism builds on the standard use of the Contributing Source (CSRC) list in the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) packet for source identification. The method makes use of the same "text/t140" and "text/red" formats as for two-party sessions.
Solutions using multiple RTP streams in the same RTP session are briefly mentioned, as they could have some benefits over the RTP-mixer model. The RTP-mixer model was selected to be used for the fully specified solution in this document because it can be applied to a wide range of existing RTP implementations.
A capability exchange is specified so that it can be verified that a mixer and a participant can handle the multiparty-coded real-time text stream using the RTP-mixer method. The capability is indicated by the use of a Session Description Protocol (SDP) (RFC 8866) media attribute, "rtt-mixer".
This document updates RFC 4103 ("RTP Payload for Text Conversation").
A specification for how a mixer can format text for the case when the endpoint is not multiparty aware is also provided.
Abstract
This document provides enhancements of real-time text (as specified in RFC 4103) suitable for mixing in a centralized conference model, enabling source identification and rapidly interleaved transmission of text from different sources. The intended use is for real-time text mixers and participant endpoints capable of providing an efficient presentation or other treatment of a multiparty real-time text session. The specified mechanism builds on the standard use of the Contributing Source (CSRC) list in the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) packet for source identification. The method makes use of the same "text/t140" and "text/red" formats as for two-party sessions.
Solutions using multiple RTP streams in the same RTP session are briefly mentioned, as they could have some benefits over the RTP-mixer model. The RTP-mixer model was selected to be used for the fully specified solution in this document because it can be applied to a wide range of existing RTP implementations.
A capability exchange is specified so that it can be verified that a mixer and a participant can handle the multiparty-coded real-time text stream using the RTP-mixer method. The capability is indicated by the use of a Session Description Protocol (SDP) (RFC 8866) media attribute, "rtt-mixer".
This document updates RFC 4103 ("RTP Payload for Text Conversation").
A specification for how a mixer can format text for the case when the endpoint is not multiparty aware is also provided.
RFC 8866: SDP: Session Description Protocol
Proposed Standard- A. Begen
- P. Kyzivat
- C. Perkins
- M. Handley
- January 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This memo defines the Session Description Protocol (SDP). SDP is intended for describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of session announcement, session invitation, and other forms of multimedia session initiation. This document obsoletes RFC 4566.
Abstract
This memo defines the Session Description Protocol (SDP). SDP is intended for describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of session announcement, session invitation, and other forms of multimedia session initiation. This document obsoletes RFC 4566.
RFC 8840: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Usage for Incremental Provisioning of Candidates for the Interactive Connectivity Establishment (Trickle ICE)
Proposed Standard- E. Ivov
- T. Stach
- E. Marocco
- C. Holmberg
- January 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) protocol describes a Network Address Translator (NAT) traversal mechanism for UDP-based multimedia sessions established with the Offer/Answer model. The ICE extension for Incremental Provisioning of Candidates (Trickle ICE) defines a mechanism that allows ICE Agents to shorten session establishment delays by making the candidate gathering and connectivity checking phases of ICE non-blocking and by executing them in parallel.
This document defines usage semantics for Trickle ICE with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The document also defines a new SIP Info Package to support this usage together with the corresponding media type. Additionally, a new Session Description Protocol (SDP) "end-of-candidates" attribute and a new SIP option tag "trickle-ice" are defined.
Abstract
The Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) protocol describes a Network Address Translator (NAT) traversal mechanism for UDP-based multimedia sessions established with the Offer/Answer model. The ICE extension for Incremental Provisioning of Candidates (Trickle ICE) defines a mechanism that allows ICE Agents to shorten session establishment delays by making the candidate gathering and connectivity checking phases of ICE non-blocking and by executing them in parallel.
This document defines usage semantics for Trickle ICE with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The document also defines a new SIP Info Package to support this usage together with the corresponding media type. Additionally, a new Session Description Protocol (SDP) "end-of-candidates" attribute and a new SIP option tag "trickle-ice" are defined.
RFC 8844: Unknown Key-Share Attacks on Uses of TLS with the Session Description Protocol (SDP)
Proposed Standard- M. Thomson
- E. Rescorla
- January 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes unknown key-share attacks on the use of Datagram Transport Layer Security for the Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol (DTLS-SRTP). Similar attacks are described on the use of DTLS-SRTP with the identity bindings used in Web Real-Time Communications (WebRTC) and SIP identity. These attacks are difficult to mount, but they cause a victim to be misled about the identity of a communicating peer. This document defines mitigation techniques that implementations of RFC 8122 are encouraged to deploy.
Abstract
This document describes unknown key-share attacks on the use of Datagram Transport Layer Security for the Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol (DTLS-SRTP). Similar attacks are described on the use of DTLS-SRTP with the identity bindings used in Web Real-Time Communications (WebRTC) and SIP identity. These attacks are difficult to mount, but they cause a victim to be misled about the identity of a communicating peer. This document defines mitigation techniques that implementations of RFC 8122 are encouraged to deploy.
RFC 8850: Controlling Multiple Streams for Telepresence (CLUE) Protocol Data Channel
Experimental- C. Holmberg
- January 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines how to use the WebRTC data channel mechanism to realize a data channel, referred to as a Controlling Multiple Streams for Telepresence (CLUE) data channel, for transporting CLUE protocol messages between two CLUE entities.
Abstract
This document defines how to use the WebRTC data channel mechanism to realize a data channel, referred to as a Controlling Multiple Streams for Telepresence (CLUE) data channel, for transporting CLUE protocol messages between two CLUE entities.
RFC 8862: BCP 228: Best Practices for Securing RTP Media Signaled with SIP
Best Current Practice- J. Peterson
- R. Barnes
- R. Housley
- January 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Although the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) includes a suite of security services that has been expanded by numerous specifications over the years, there is no single place that explains how to use SIP to establish confidential media sessions. Additionally, existing mechanisms have some feature gaps that need to be identified and resolved in order for them to address the pervasive monitoring threat model. This specification describes best practices for negotiating confidential media with SIP, including a comprehensive protection solution that binds the media layer to SIP layer identities.
Abstract
Although the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) includes a suite of security services that has been expanded by numerous specifications over the years, there is no single place that explains how to use SIP to establish confidential media sessions. Additionally, existing mechanisms have some feature gaps that need to be identified and resolved in order for them to address the pervasive monitoring threat model. This specification describes best practices for negotiating confidential media with SIP, including a comprehensive protection solution that binds the media layer to SIP layer identities.
RFC 8898: Third-Party Token-Based Authentication and Authorization for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- R. Shekh-Yusef
- C. Holmberg
- V. Pascual
- September 2020
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines the "Bearer" authentication scheme for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and a mechanism by which user authentication and SIP registration authorization is delegated to a third party, using the OAuth 2.0 framework and OpenID Connect Core 1.0. This document updates RFC 3261 to provide guidance on how a SIP User Agent Client (UAC) responds to a SIP 401/407 response that contains multiple WWW-Authenticate/Proxy-Authenticate header fields.
Abstract
This document defines the "Bearer" authentication scheme for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and a mechanism by which user authentication and SIP registration authorization is delegated to a third party, using the OAuth 2.0 framework and OpenID Connect Core 1.0. This document updates RFC 3261 to provide guidance on how a SIP User Agent Client (UAC) responds to a SIP 401/407 response that contains multiple WWW-Authenticate/Proxy-Authenticate header fields.
RFC 8787: Location Source Parameter for the SIP Geolocation Header Field
Proposed Standard- J. Winterbottom
- R. Jesske
- B. Chatras
- A. Hutton
- May 2020
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
There are some circumstances where a Geolocation header field may contain more than one locationValue. Knowing the identity of the node adding the locationValue allows the recipient more freedom in selecting the value to look at first rather than relying solely on the order of the locationValues. This document defines the "loc-src" parameter so that the entity adding the locationValue to the Geolocation header field can identify itself using its hostname. This document updates RFC 6442.
Abstract
There are some circumstances where a Geolocation header field may contain more than one locationValue. Knowing the identity of the node adding the locationValue allows the recipient more freedom in selecting the value to look at first rather than relying solely on the order of the locationValues. This document defines the "loc-src" parameter so that the entity adding the locationValue to the Geolocation header field can identify itself using its hostname. This document updates RFC 6442.
RFC 8760: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Digest Access Authentication Scheme
Proposed Standard- R. Shekh-Yusef
- March 2020
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3261 by modifying the Digest Access Authentication scheme used by the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to add support for more secure digest algorithms, e.g., SHA-256 and SHA-512/256, to replace the obsolete MD5 algorithm.
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3261 by modifying the Digest Access Authentication scheme used by the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to add support for more secure digest algorithms, e.g., SHA-256 and SHA-512/256, to replace the obsolete MD5 algorithm.
RFC 8643: An Opportunistic Approach for Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (OSRTP)
Informational- A. Johnston
- B. Aboba
- A. Hutton
- R. Jesske
- T. Stach
- August 2019
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Opportunistic Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (OSRTP) is an implementation of the Opportunistic Security mechanism, as defined in RFC 7435, applied to the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP). OSRTP allows encrypted media to be used in environments where support for encryption is not known in advance and is not required. OSRTP does not require Session Description Protocol (SDP) extensions or features and is fully backwards compatible with existing implementations using encrypted and authenticated media and implementations that do not encrypt or authenticate media packets. OSRTP is not specific to any key management technique for Secure RTP (SRTP). OSRTP is a transitional approach useful for migrating existing deployments of real-time communications to a fully encrypted and authenticated state.
Abstract
Opportunistic Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (OSRTP) is an implementation of the Opportunistic Security mechanism, as defined in RFC 7435, applied to the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP). OSRTP allows encrypted media to be used in environments where support for encryption is not known in advance and is not required. OSRTP does not require Session Description Protocol (SDP) extensions or features and is fully backwards compatible with existing implementations using encrypted and authenticated media and implementations that do not encrypt or authenticate media packets. OSRTP is not specific to any key management technique for Secure RTP (SRTP). OSRTP is a transitional approach useful for migrating existing deployments of real-time communications to a fully encrypted and authenticated state.
RFC 8606: ISDN User Part (ISUP) Cause Location Parameter for the SIP Reason Header Field
Proposed Standard- R. Jesske
- June 2019
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The SIP Reason header field is defined to carry ISUP (ISDN User Part) cause values as well as SIP response codes. Some services in SIP networks may need to know the ISUP location where the call was released in the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) to correctly interpret the reason of release. This document updates RFC 3326 by adding a location parameter for this purpose.
Abstract
The SIP Reason header field is defined to carry ISUP (ISDN User Part) cause values as well as SIP response codes. Some services in SIP networks may need to know the ISUP location where the call was released in the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) to correctly interpret the reason of release. This document updates RFC 3326 by adding a location parameter for this purpose.
RFC 8599: Push Notification with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- M. Arnold
- May 2019
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes how a Push Notification Service (PNS) can be used to wake a suspended Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) with push notifications, and it also describes how the UA can send binding-refresh REGISTER requests and receive incoming SIP requests in an environment in which the UA may be suspended. The document defines new SIP URI parameters to exchange PNS information between the UA and the SIP entity that will then request that push notifications be sent to the UA. It also defines the parameters to trigger such push notification requests. The document also defines new feature-capability indicators that can be used to indicate support of this mechanism.
Abstract
This document describes how a Push Notification Service (PNS) can be used to wake a suspended Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) with push notifications, and it also describes how the UA can send binding-refresh REGISTER requests and receive incoming SIP requests in an environment in which the UA may be suspended. The document defines new SIP URI parameters to exchange PNS information between the UA and the SIP entity that will then request that push notifications be sent to the UA. It also defines the parameters to trigger such push notification requests. The document also defines new feature-capability indicators that can be used to indicate support of this mechanism.
RFC 8591: SIP-Based Messaging with S/MIME
Proposed Standard- B. Campbell
- R. Housley
- April 2019
- IETF publication
Abstract
Mobile messaging applications used with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) commonly use some combination of the SIP MESSAGE method and the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP). While these provide mechanisms for hop-by-hop security, neither natively provides end-to-end protection. This document offers guidance on how to provide end-to-end authentication, integrity protection, and confidentiality using the Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME). It updates and provides clarifications for RFCs 3261, 3428, and 4975.
Abstract
Mobile messaging applications used with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) commonly use some combination of the SIP MESSAGE method and the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP). While these provide mechanisms for hop-by-hop security, neither natively provides end-to-end protection. This document offers guidance on how to provide end-to-end authentication, integrity protection, and confidentiality using the Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME). It updates and provides clarifications for RFCs 3261, 3428, and 4975.
RFC 8498: A P-Served-User Header Field Parameter for an Originating Call Diversion (CDIV) Session Case in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- M. Mohali
- February 2019
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The P-Served-User header field was defined based on a requirement from the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) in order to convey the identity of the served user, his/ her registration state, and the session case that applies to that particular communication session and application invocation. A session case is metadata that captures the status of the session of a served user regardless of whether or not the served user is registered or the session originates or terminates with the served user. This document updates RFC 5502 by defining a new P-Served-User header field parameter, "orig-cdiv". The parameter conveys the session case used by a proxy when handling an originating session after Call Diversion (CDIV) services have been invoked for the served user. This document also fixes the ABNF in RFC 5502 and provides more guidance for using the P-Served-User header field in IP networks.
Abstract
The P-Served-User header field was defined based on a requirement from the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) in order to convey the identity of the served user, his/ her registration state, and the session case that applies to that particular communication session and application invocation. A session case is metadata that captures the status of the session of a served user regardless of whether or not the served user is registered or the session originates or terminates with the served user. This document updates RFC 5502 by defining a new P-Served-User header field parameter, "orig-cdiv". The parameter conveys the session case used by a proxy when handling an originating session after Call Diversion (CDIV) services have been invoked for the served user. This document also fixes the ABNF in RFC 5502 and provides more guidance for using the P-Served-User header field in IP networks.
RFC 8507: Simple Internet Protocol (SIP) Specification
Historic- S. Deering
- R. Hinden
- December 2018
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document is published for the historical record. The Simple Internet Protocol was the basis for one of the candidates for the IETF's Next Generation (IPng) work that became IPv6.
The publication date of the original Internet-Draft was November 10, 1992. It is presented here substantially unchanged and is neither a complete document nor intended to be implementable.
The paragraph that follows is the Abstract from the original draft.
This document specifies a new version of IP called SIP, the Simple Internet Protocol. It also describes the changes needed to ICMP, IGMP, and transport protocols such as TCP and UDP, in order to work with SIP. A companion document [SIP-ADDR] describes the addressing and routing aspects of SIP, including issues of auto-configuration, host and subnet mobility, and multicast.
Abstract
This document is published for the historical record. The Simple Internet Protocol was the basis for one of the candidates for the IETF's Next Generation (IPng) work that became IPv6.
The publication date of the original Internet-Draft was November 10, 1992. It is presented here substantially unchanged and is neither a complete document nor intended to be implementable.
The paragraph that follows is the Abstract from the original draft.
This document specifies a new version of IP called SIP, the Simple Internet Protocol. It also describes the changes needed to ICMP, IGMP, and transport protocols such as TCP and UDP, in order to work with SIP. A companion document [SIP-ADDR] describes the addressing and routing aspects of SIP, including issues of auto-configuration, host and subnet mobility, and multicast.
RFC 8497: Marking SIP Messages to Be Logged
Proposed Standard- P. Dawes
- C. Arunachalam
- November 2018
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
SIP networks use signaling monitoring tools to diagnose user-reported problems and to perform regression testing if network or user agent (UA) software is upgraded. As networks grow and become interconnected, including connection via transit networks, it becomes impractical to predict the path that SIP signaling will take between user agents and therefore impractical to monitor SIP signaling end to end.
This document describes an indicator for the SIP protocol that can be used to mark signaling as being of interest to logging. Such marking will typically be applied as part of network testing controlled by the network operator and is not used in normal user agent signaling. Operators of all networks on the signaling path can agree to carry such marking end to end, including the originating and terminating SIP user agents, even if a session originates and terminates in different networks.
Abstract
SIP networks use signaling monitoring tools to diagnose user-reported problems and to perform regression testing if network or user agent (UA) software is upgraded. As networks grow and become interconnected, including connection via transit networks, it becomes impractical to predict the path that SIP signaling will take between user agents and therefore impractical to monitor SIP signaling end to end.
This document describes an indicator for the SIP protocol that can be used to mark signaling as being of interest to logging. Such marking will typically be applied as part of network testing controlled by the network operator and is not used in normal user agent signaling. Operators of all networks on the signaling path can agree to carry such marking end to end, including the originating and terminating SIP user agents, even if a session originates and terminates in different networks.
RFC 8496: P-Charge-Info: A Private Header Field (P-Header) Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- D. York
- T. Asveren
- October 2018
- IETF publication
Abstract
This text documents the current usage of P-Charge-Info, an existing Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) private header field (P-Header) used to convey billing information about the party to be charged. This P-Header is currently used in production by several equipment vendors and carriers and has been in use since at least 2007. This document details the registration of this header field with IANA.
Abstract
This text documents the current usage of P-Charge-Info, an existing Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) private header field (P-Header) used to convey billing information about the party to be charged. This P-Header is currently used in production by several equipment vendors and carriers and has been in use since at least 2007. This document details the registration of this header field with IANA.
RFC 8433: A Simpler Method for Resolving Alert-Info URNs
Informational- D. Worley
- August 2018
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
The "alert" namespace of Uniform Resource Names (URNs) can be used in the Alert-Info header field of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) requests and responses to inform a voice over IP (VoIP) telephone (user agent) of the characteristics of the call that the user agent has originated or terminated. The user agent must resolve the URNs into a signal; that is, it must select the best available signal to present to its user to indicate the characteristics of the call.
RFC 7462 describes a non-normative algorithm for signal selection. This document describes a more efficient alternative algorithm: a user agent's designer can, based on the user agent's signals and their meanings, construct a finite state machine (FSM) to process the URNs to select a signal in a way that obeys the restrictions given in the definition of the "alert" URN namespace.
Abstract
The "alert" namespace of Uniform Resource Names (URNs) can be used in the Alert-Info header field of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) requests and responses to inform a voice over IP (VoIP) telephone (user agent) of the characteristics of the call that the user agent has originated or terminated. The user agent must resolve the URNs into a signal; that is, it must select the best available signal to present to its user to indicate the characteristics of the call.
RFC 7462 describes a non-normative algorithm for signal selection. This document describes a more efficient alternative algorithm: a user agent's designer can, based on the user agent's signals and their meanings, construct a finite state machine (FSM) to process the URNs to select a signal in a way that obeys the restrictions given in the definition of the "alert" URN namespace.
RFC 8396: Managing, Ordering, Distributing, Exposing, and Registering Telephone Numbers (MODERN): Problem Statement, Use Cases, and Framework
Informational- J. Peterson
- T. McGarry
- July 2018
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The functions of the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) are rapidly migrating to the Internet. This is generating new requirements for many traditional elements of the PSTN, including Telephone Numbers (TNs). TNs no longer serve simply as telephone routing addresses: they are now identifiers that may be used by Internet-based services for a variety of purposes including session establishment, identity verification, and service enablement. This problem statement examines how the existing tools for allocating and managing telephone numbers do not align with the use cases of the Internet environment and proposes a framework for Internet-based services relying on TNs.
Abstract
The functions of the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) are rapidly migrating to the Internet. This is generating new requirements for many traditional elements of the PSTN, including Telephone Numbers (TNs). TNs no longer serve simply as telephone routing addresses: they are now identifiers that may be used by Internet-based services for a variety of purposes including session establishment, identity verification, and service enablement. This problem statement examines how the existing tools for allocating and managing telephone numbers do not align with the use cases of the Internet environment and proposes a framework for Internet-based services relying on TNs.
RFC 8373: Negotiating Human Language in Real-Time Communications
Proposed Standard- R. Gellens
- May 2018
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Users have various human (i.e., natural) language needs, abilities, and preferences regarding spoken, written, and signed languages. This document defines new Session Description Protocol (SDP) media- level attributes so that when establishing interactive communication sessions ("calls"), it is possible to negotiate (i.e., communicate and match) the caller's language and media needs with the capabilities of the called party. This is especially important for emergency calls, because it allows for a call to be handled by a call taker capable of communicating with the user or for a translator or relay operator to be bridged into the call during setup. However, this also applies to non-emergency calls (for example, calls to a company call center).
This document describes the need as well as a solution that uses new SDP media attributes.
Abstract
Users have various human (i.e., natural) language needs, abilities, and preferences regarding spoken, written, and signed languages. This document defines new Session Description Protocol (SDP) media- level attributes so that when establishing interactive communication sessions ("calls"), it is possible to negotiate (i.e., communicate and match) the caller's language and media needs with the capabilities of the called party. This is especially important for emergency calls, because it allows for a call to be handled by a call taker capable of communicating with the user or for a translator or relay operator to be bridged into the call during setup. However, this also applies to non-emergency calls (for example, calls to a company call center).
This document describes the need as well as a solution that uses new SDP media attributes.
RFC 8262: Content-ID Header Field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- I. Sedlacek
- October 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies the Content-ID header field for usage in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document also updates RFC 5621, which only allows a Content-ID URL to reference a body part that is part of a multipart message-body. This update enables a Content-ID URL to reference a complete message-body and metadata provided by some additional SIP header fields.
This document updates RFC 5368 and RFC 6442 by clarifying their usage of the SIP Content-ID header field.
Abstract
This document specifies the Content-ID header field for usage in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document also updates RFC 5621, which only allows a Content-ID URL to reference a body part that is part of a multipart message-body. This update enables a Content-ID URL to reference a complete message-body and metadata provided by some additional SIP header fields.
This document updates RFC 5368 and RFC 6442 by clarifying their usage of the SIP Content-ID header field.
RFC 8255: Multiple Language Content Type
Proposed Standard- N. Tomkinson
- N. Borenstein
- October 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines the 'multipart/multilingual' content type, which is an addition to the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) standard. This content type makes it possible to send one message that contains multiple language versions of the same information. The translations would be identified by a language tag and selected by the email client based on a user's language settings.
Abstract
This document defines the 'multipart/multilingual' content type, which is an addition to the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) standard. This content type makes it possible to send one message that contains multiple language versions of the same information. The translations would be identified by a language tag and selected by the email client based on a user's language settings.
RFC 8266: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- October 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities. This document obsoletes RFC 7700.
Abstract
This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities. This document obsoletes RFC 7700.
RFC 8217: Clarifications for When to Use the name-addr Production in SIP Messages
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- August 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
RFC 3261 constrained several SIP header fields whose grammar contains the "name-addr / addr-spec" alternative to use name-addr when certain characters appear. Unfortunately, it expressed the constraints with prose copied into each header field definition, and at least one header field was missed. Further, the constraint has not been copied into documents defining extension headers whose grammar contains the alternative.
This document updates RFC 3261 to state the constraint generically and clarifies that the constraint applies to all SIP header fields where there is a choice between using name-addr or addr-spec. It also updates the RFCs that define extension SIP header fields using the alternative to clarify that the constraint applies (RFCs 3325, 3515, 3892, 4508, 5002, 5318, 5360, and 5502).
Abstract
RFC 3261 constrained several SIP header fields whose grammar contains the "name-addr / addr-spec" alternative to use name-addr when certain characters appear. Unfortunately, it expressed the constraints with prose copied into each header field definition, and at least one header field was missed. Further, the constraint has not been copied into documents defining extension headers whose grammar contains the alternative.
This document updates RFC 3261 to state the constraint generically and clarifies that the constraint applies to all SIP header fields where there is a choice between using name-addr or addr-spec. It also updates the RFCs that define extension SIP header fields using the alternative to clarify that the constraint applies (RFCs 3325, 3515, 3892, 4508, 5002, 5318, 5360, and 5502).
RFC 8197: A SIP Response Code for Unwanted Calls
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- July 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines the 607 (Unwanted) SIP response code, allowing called parties to indicate that the call or message was unwanted. SIP entities may use this information to adjust how future calls from this calling party are handled for the called party or more broadly.
Abstract
This document defines the 607 (Unwanted) SIP response code, allowing called parties to indicate that the call or message was unwanted. SIP entities may use this information to adjust how future calls from this calling party are handled for the called party or more broadly.
RFC 8101: IANA Registration of New Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority Namespace for Mission Critical Push To Talk Service
Informational- C. Holmberg
- J. Axell
- March 2017
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document creates additional Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority namespaces to meet the requirements of the 3GPP-defined Mission Critical Push To Talk (MCPTT) and places these namespaces in the corresponding IANA registry.
Abstract
This document creates additional Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority namespaces to meet the requirements of the 3GPP-defined Mission Critical Push To Talk (MCPTT) and places these namespaces in the corresponding IANA registry.
RFC 8123: Requirements for Marking SIP Messages to be Logged
Informational- P. Dawes
- C. Arunachalam
- March 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
SIP networks use signaling monitoring tools to debug customer- reported problems and for regression testing if network or client software is upgraded. As networks grow and become interconnected, including connection via transit networks, it becomes impractical to predict the path that SIP signaling will take between clients and, therefore, impractical to monitor SIP signaling end-to-end.
This document describes the requirements for adding an indicator to the SIP Protocol Data Unit (PDU) or a SIP message that marks the PDU as a candidate for logging. Such a marking will typically be applied as part of network testing controlled by the network operator and not used in regular client signaling. However, such a marking can be carried end-to-end, including the SIP terminals, even if a session originates and terminates in different networks.
Abstract
SIP networks use signaling monitoring tools to debug customer- reported problems and for regression testing if network or client software is upgraded. As networks grow and become interconnected, including connection via transit networks, it becomes impractical to predict the path that SIP signaling will take between clients and, therefore, impractical to monitor SIP signaling end-to-end.
This document describes the requirements for adding an indicator to the SIP Protocol Data Unit (PDU) or a SIP message that marks the PDU as a candidate for logging. Such a marking will typically be applied as part of network testing controlled by the network operator and not used in regular client signaling. However, such a marking can be carried end-to-end, including the SIP terminals, even if a session originates and terminates in different networks.
RFC 8119: SIP "cause" URI Parameter for Service Number Translation
Informational- M. Mohali
- M. Barnes
- March 2017
- IETF publication
Abstract
RFC 4458 (regarding SIP URIs for applications) defines a "cause" URI parameter, which may appear in the Request-URI of a SIP request, that is used to indicate a reason why the request arrived to the User Agent Server (UAS) receiving the message. This document updates RFC 4458 by creating a new predefined value for the "cause" URI parameter to cover service number translation for cases of retargeting due to specific service action leading to the translation of a called service access number. This document also provides guidance, which was missing in RFC 4458, for using the "cause" URI parameter within the History-Info header field, since this use is mandatory in some IP networks' implementations.
Abstract
RFC 4458 (regarding SIP URIs for applications) defines a "cause" URI parameter, which may appear in the Request-URI of a SIP request, that is used to indicate a reason why the request arrived to the User Agent Server (UAS) receiving the message. This document updates RFC 4458 by creating a new predefined value for the "cause" URI parameter to cover service number translation for cases of retargeting due to specific service action leading to the translation of a called service access number. This document also provides guidance, which was missing in RFC 4458, for using the "cause" URI parameter within the History-Info header field, since this use is mandatory in some IP networks' implementations.
RFC 8079: Guidelines for End-to-End Support of the RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) in Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs)
Proposed Standard- L. Miniero
- S. Garcia Murillo
- V. Pascual
- February 2017
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
SIP Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) are often designed to also be on the media path, rather than just to intercept signalling. This means that B2BUAs often implement an RTP or RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) stack as well, thus leading to separate multimedia sessions that the B2BUA correlates and bridges together. If not disciplined, this behaviour can severely impact the communication experience, especially when statistics and feedback information contained in RTCP messages get lost because of mismatches in the reported data.
This document defines the proper behaviour B2BUAs should follow when acting on both the signalling plane and media plane in order to preserve the end-to-end functionality of RTCP.
Abstract
SIP Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) are often designed to also be on the media path, rather than just to intercept signalling. This means that B2BUAs often implement an RTP or RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) stack as well, thus leading to separate multimedia sessions that the B2BUA correlates and bridges together. If not disciplined, this behaviour can severely impact the communication experience, especially when statistics and feedback information contained in RTCP messages get lost because of mismatches in the reported data.
This document defines the proper behaviour B2BUAs should follow when acting on both the signalling plane and media plane in order to preserve the end-to-end functionality of RTCP.
RFC 8055: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Via Header Field Parameter to Indicate Received Realm
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- Y. Jiang
- January 2017
- IETF publication
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Via header field parameter, 'received-realm', which allows a SIP entity acting as an entry point to a transit network to indicate from which adjacent upstream network a SIP request is received by using a network realm value associated with the adjacent network.
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Via header field parameter, 'received-realm', which allows a SIP entity acting as an entry point to a transit network to indicate from which adjacent upstream network a SIP request is received by using a network realm value associated with the adjacent network.
RFC 8048: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Presence
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- December 2016
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of presence information between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). This document obsoletes RFC 7248.
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of presence information between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). This document obsoletes RFC 7248.
RFC 7989: End-to-End Session Identification in IP-Based Multimedia Communication Networks
Proposed Standard- P. Jones
- G. Salgueiro
- C. Pearce
- P. Giralt
- October 2016
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes an end-to-end session identifier for use in IP-based multimedia communication systems that enables endpoints, intermediary devices, and management systems to identify a session end-to-end, associate multiple endpoints with a given multipoint conference, track communication sessions when they are redirected, and associate one or more media flows with a given communication session. While the identifier is intended to work across multiple protocols, this document describes its usage in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
This document also describes a backwards-compatibility mechanism for an existing session identifier implementation (RFC 7329) that is sufficiently different from the procedures defined in this document.
This document obsoletes RFC 7329.
Abstract
This document describes an end-to-end session identifier for use in IP-based multimedia communication systems that enables endpoints, intermediary devices, and management systems to identify a session end-to-end, associate multiple endpoints with a given multipoint conference, track communication sessions when they are redirected, and associate one or more media flows with a given communication session. While the identifier is intended to work across multiple protocols, this document describes its usage in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
This document also describes a backwards-compatibility mechanism for an existing session identifier implementation (RFC 7329) that is sufficiently different from the procedures defined in this document.
This document obsoletes RFC 7329.
RFC 7984: Locating Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers in a Dual-Stack IP Network
Proposed Standard- O. Johansson
- G. Salgueiro
- V. Gurbani
- D. Worley
- September 2016
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
RFC 3263 defines how a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) implementation, given a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), should locate the next-hop SIP server using Domain Name System (DNS) procedures. As SIP networks increasingly transition from IPv4-only to dual-stack, a quality user experience must be ensured for dual- stack SIP implementations. This document updates the DNS procedures described in RFC 3263 for dual-stack SIP implementations in preparation for forthcoming specifications for applying "Happy Eyeballs" principles to SIP.
Abstract
RFC 3263 defines how a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) implementation, given a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), should locate the next-hop SIP server using Domain Name System (DNS) procedures. As SIP networks increasingly transition from IPv4-only to dual-stack, a quality user experience must be ensured for dual- stack SIP implementations. This document updates the DNS procedures described in RFC 3263 for dual-stack SIP implementations in preparation for forthcoming specifications for applying "Happy Eyeballs" principles to SIP.
RFC 7976: Updates to Private Header (P-Header) Extension Usage in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Requests and Responses
Informational- C. Holmberg
- N. Biondic
- G. Salgueiro
- September 2016
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has identified cases where different SIP private header extensions referred to as "P-" header fields, and defined in RFC 7315, need to be included in SIP requests and responses currently not allowed according to RFC 7315. This document updates RFC 7315, in order to allow inclusion of the affected "P-" header fields in such requests and responses.
This document also makes updates for RFC 7315 in order to fix misalignments that occurred when RFC 3455 was updated and obsoleted by RFC 7315.
- Obsoleted by RFC 9878
Abstract
The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has identified cases where different SIP private header extensions referred to as "P-" header fields, and defined in RFC 7315, need to be included in SIP requests and responses currently not allowed according to RFC 7315. This document updates RFC 7315, in order to allow inclusion of the affected "P-" header fields in such requests and responses.
This document also makes updates for RFC 7315 in order to fix misalignments that occurred when RFC 3455 was updated and obsoleted by RFC 7315.
RFC 7957: BCP 67: DISPATCH-Style Working Groups and the SIP Change Process
Best Current Practice- B. Campbell
- A. Cooper
- B. Leiba
- August 2016
- IETF publication
Abstract
RFC 5727 defined several processes for the former Real-time Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) area. These processes include the evolution of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and related protocols, as well as the operation of the DISPATCH and SIPCORE working groups. This document updates RFC 5727 to allow flexibility for the area and working group structure, while preserving the SIP change processes. It also generalizes the DISPATCH working group processes so that they can be easily adopted by other working groups.
Abstract
RFC 5727 defined several processes for the former Real-time Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) area. These processes include the evolution of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and related protocols, as well as the operation of the DISPATCH and SIPCORE working groups. This document updates RFC 5727 to allow flexibility for the area and working group structure, while preserving the SIP change processes. It also generalizes the DISPATCH working group processes so that they can be easily adopted by other working groups.
RFC 7913: P-Access-Network-Info ABNF Update
Informational- C. Holmberg
- June 2016
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 7315, by modifying the extension-access- info part of the P-Access-Network-Info header field Augmented Backus- Naur Form (ABNF), and by adding the following 'access-info' header field parameter values to the list of 'access-info' header field parameter values in the ABNF: 'operator-specific-GI' and 'utran-sai-3gpp'. The values are defined in the ABNF but are not included in the list.
Abstract
This document updates RFC 7315, by modifying the extension-access- info part of the P-Access-Network-Info header field Augmented Backus- Naur Form (ABNF), and by adding the following 'access-info' header field parameter values to the list of 'access-info' header field parameter values in the ABNF: 'operator-specific-GI' and 'utran-sai-3gpp'. The values are defined in the ABNF but are not included in the list.
RFC 7879: DTLS-SRTP Handling in SIP Back-to-Back User Agents
Proposed Standard- R. Ravindranath
- T. Reddy
- G. Salgueiro
- V. Pascual
- P. Ravindran
- May 2016
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) exist on the signaling and media paths between the endpoints. This document describes the behavior of B2BUAs when Secure Real-time Transport (SRTP) security context is set up with the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol.
Abstract
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) exist on the signaling and media paths between the endpoints. This document describes the behavior of B2BUAs when Secure Real-time Transport (SRTP) security context is set up with the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol.
RFC 7700: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- December 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities.
- Obsoleted by RFC 8266
Abstract
This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities.
RFC 7702: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Groupchat
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- S. Ibarra
- S. Loreto
- December 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of instant messages in the context of a multi-party chat session among users of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and users of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). Specifically, this document defines a mapping between the SIP-based Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) and the XMPP Multi-User Chat (MUC) extension.
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of instant messages in the context of a multi-party chat session among users of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and users of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). Specifically, this document defines a mapping between the SIP-based Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) and the XMPP Multi-User Chat (MUC) extension.
RFC 7647: Clarifications for the Use of REFER with RFC 6665
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- A.B. Roach
- September 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification framework. That framework was revised by RFC 6665. This document highlights the implications of the requirement changes in RFC 6665, and updates the definition of the REFER method described in RFC 3515 to clarify and disambiguate the impact of those changes.
Abstract
The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification framework. That framework was revised by RFC 6665. This document highlights the implications of the requirement changes in RFC 6665, and updates the definition of the REFER method described in RFC 3515 to clarify and disambiguate the impact of those changes.
RFC 7614: Explicit Subscriptions for the REFER Method
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- August 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER request, as defined by RFC 3515, triggers an implicit SIP-Specific Event Notification framework subscription. Conflating the start of the subscription with handling the REFER request makes negotiating SUBSCRIBE extensions impossible and complicates avoiding SIP dialog sharing. This document defines extensions to REFER that remove the implicit subscription and, if desired, replace it with an explicit one.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER request, as defined by RFC 3515, triggers an implicit SIP-Specific Event Notification framework subscription. Conflating the start of the subscription with handling the REFER request makes negotiating SUBSCRIBE extensions impossible and complicates avoiding SIP dialog sharing. This document defines extensions to REFER that remove the implicit subscription and, if desired, replace it with an explicit one.
RFC 7621: A Clarification on the Use of Globally Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the SIP Event Notification Framework
Proposed Standard- A.B. Roach
- August 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Experience since the publication of the most recent SIP Events framework (in July 2012) has shown that there is room for interpretation around the use of Globally Routable User Agent URIs in that specification. This document clarifies the intended behavior.
This document updates RFC 6665.
Abstract
Experience since the publication of the most recent SIP Events framework (in July 2012) has shown that there is room for interpretation around the use of Globally Routable User Agent URIs in that specification. This document clarifies the intended behavior.
This document updates RFC 6665.
RFC 7544: Mapping and Interworking of Diversion Information between Diversion and History-Info Header Fields in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- M. Mohali
- August 2015
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Although the SIP History-Info header field described in RFC 7044 is the solution adopted in IETF, the non-standard Diversion header field described, as Historic, in RFC 5806 is nevertheless already implemented and used for conveying call-diversion-related information in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) signaling.
RFC 7044 obsoletes the original RFC 4244 and redefines the History-Info header field for capturing the history information in requests.
Since the Diversion header field is used in existing network implementations for the transport of call diversion information, its interworking with the SIP History-Info standardized solution is needed. This document describes a recommended interworking guideline between the Diversion header field and the History-Info header field to handle call diversion information. This work is intended to enable the migration from non-standard implementations toward IETF specification-based implementations.
This document obsoletes RFC 6044, which describes the interworking between the Diversion header field defined in RFC 5806 and the obsoleted History-Info header field defined on RFC 4244.
Abstract
Although the SIP History-Info header field described in RFC 7044 is the solution adopted in IETF, the non-standard Diversion header field described, as Historic, in RFC 5806 is nevertheless already implemented and used for conveying call-diversion-related information in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) signaling.
RFC 7044 obsoletes the original RFC 4244 and redefines the History-Info header field for capturing the history information in requests.
Since the Diversion header field is used in existing network implementations for the transport of call diversion information, its interworking with the SIP History-Info standardized solution is needed. This document describes a recommended interworking guideline between the Diversion header field and the History-Info header field to handle call diversion information. This work is intended to enable the migration from non-standard implementations toward IETF specification-based implementations.
This document obsoletes RFC 6044, which describes the interworking between the Diversion header field defined in RFC 5806 and the obsoleted History-Info header field defined on RFC 4244.
RFC 7584: Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Message Handling for SIP Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs)
Proposed Standard- R. Ravindranath
- T. Reddy
- G. Salgueiro
- July 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) are often designed to be on the media path rather than just intercepting signaling. This means that B2BUAs often act on the media path leading to separate media legs that the B2BUA correlates and bridges together. When acting on the media path, B2BUAs are likely to receive Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) packets as part of Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) processing.
This document defines behavior for a B2BUA performing ICE processing. The goal of this document is to ensure that B2BUAs properly handle SIP messages that carry ICE semantics in Session Description Protocol (SDP) and STUN messages received as part of the ICE procedures for NAT and Firewall traversal of multimedia sessions.
Abstract
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) are often designed to be on the media path rather than just intercepting signaling. This means that B2BUAs often act on the media path leading to separate media legs that the B2BUA correlates and bridges together. When acting on the media path, B2BUAs are likely to receive Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) packets as part of Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) processing.
This document defines behavior for a B2BUA performing ICE processing. The goal of this document is to ensure that B2BUAs properly handle SIP messages that carry ICE semantics in Session Description Protocol (SDP) and STUN messages received as part of the ICE procedures for NAT and Firewall traversal of multimedia sessions.
RFC 7572: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- A. Houri
- J. Hildebrand
- June 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of single instant messages between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of single instant messages between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
RFC 7573: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): One-to-One Text Chat Sessions
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- S. Loreto
- June 2015
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of instant messages in the context of a one-to-one chat session between a user of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and a user of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). Specifically for SIP text chat, this document specifies a mapping to the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP).
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of instant messages in the context of a one-to-one chat session between a user of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and a user of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). Specifically for SIP text chat, this document specifies a mapping to the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP).
RFC 7549: 3GPP SIP URI Inter-Operator Traffic Leg Parameter
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- J. Holm
- R. Jesske
- M. Dolly
- May 2015
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
In 3GPP networks, the signaling path between a calling user and a called user can be partitioned into segments, referred to as traffic legs. Each traffic leg may span networks belonging to different operators and will have its own characteristics that can be different from other traffic legs in the same call. A traffic leg might be associated with multiple SIP dialogs, e.g., in case a Back-to-Back User Agent (B2BUA) that modifies the SIP dialog identifier is located within the traffic leg.
This document defines a new SIP URI parameter, 'iotl' (an abbreviation for Inter-Operator Traffic Leg). The parameter can be used in a SIP URI to indicate that the entity associated with the address, or an entity responsible for the host part of the address, represents the end of a specific traffic leg (or multiple traffic legs).
Abstract
In 3GPP networks, the signaling path between a calling user and a called user can be partitioned into segments, referred to as traffic legs. Each traffic leg may span networks belonging to different operators and will have its own characteristics that can be different from other traffic legs in the same call. A traffic leg might be associated with multiple SIP dialogs, e.g., in case a Back-to-Back User Agent (B2BUA) that modifies the SIP dialog identifier is located within the traffic leg.
This document defines a new SIP URI parameter, 'iotl' (an abbreviation for Inter-Operator Traffic Leg). The parameter can be used in a SIP URI to indicate that the entity associated with the address, or an entity responsible for the host part of the address, represents the end of a specific traffic leg (or multiple traffic legs).
RFC 7501: Terminology for Benchmarking Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Devices: Basic Session Setup and Registration
Informational- C. Davids
- V. Gurbani
- S. Poretsky
- April 2015
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document provides a terminology for benchmarking the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) performance of devices. Methodology related to benchmarking SIP devices is described in the companion methodology document (RFC 7502). Using these two documents, benchmarks can be obtained and compared for different types of devices such as SIP Proxy Servers, Registrars, and Session Border Controllers. The term "performance" in this context means the capacity of the Device Under Test (DUT) to process SIP messages. Media streams are used only to study how they impact the signaling behavior. The intent of the two documents is to provide a normalized set of tests that will enable an objective comparison of the capacity of SIP devices. Test setup parameters and a methodology are necessary because SIP allows a wide range of configurations and operational conditions that can influence performance benchmark measurements. A standard terminology and methodology will ensure that benchmarks have consistent definitions and were obtained following the same procedures.
Abstract
This document provides a terminology for benchmarking the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) performance of devices. Methodology related to benchmarking SIP devices is described in the companion methodology document (RFC 7502). Using these two documents, benchmarks can be obtained and compared for different types of devices such as SIP Proxy Servers, Registrars, and Session Border Controllers. The term "performance" in this context means the capacity of the Device Under Test (DUT) to process SIP messages. Media streams are used only to study how they impact the signaling behavior. The intent of the two documents is to provide a normalized set of tests that will enable an objective comparison of the capacity of SIP devices. Test setup parameters and a methodology are necessary because SIP allows a wide range of configurations and operational conditions that can influence performance benchmark measurements. A standard terminology and methodology will ensure that benchmarks have consistent definitions and were obtained following the same procedures.
RFC 7502: Methodology for Benchmarking Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Devices: Basic Session Setup and Registration
Informational- C. Davids
- V. Gurbani
- S. Poretsky
- April 2015
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document provides a methodology for benchmarking the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) performance of devices. Terminology related to benchmarking SIP devices is described in the companion terminology document (RFC 7501). Using these two documents, benchmarks can be obtained and compared for different types of devices such as SIP Proxy Servers, Registrars, and Session Border Controllers. The term "performance" in this context means the capacity of the Device Under Test (DUT) to process SIP messages. Media streams are used only to study how they impact the signaling behavior. The intent of the two documents is to provide a normalized set of tests that will enable an objective comparison of the capacity of SIP devices. Test setup parameters and a methodology are necessary because SIP allows a wide range of configurations and operational conditions that can influence performance benchmark measurements.
Abstract
This document provides a methodology for benchmarking the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) performance of devices. Terminology related to benchmarking SIP devices is described in the companion terminology document (RFC 7501). Using these two documents, benchmarks can be obtained and compared for different types of devices such as SIP Proxy Servers, Registrars, and Session Border Controllers. The term "performance" in this context means the capacity of the Device Under Test (DUT) to process SIP messages. Media streams are used only to study how they impact the signaling behavior. The intent of the two documents is to provide a normalized set of tests that will enable an objective comparison of the capacity of SIP devices. Test setup parameters and a methodology are necessary because SIP allows a wide range of configurations and operational conditions that can influence performance benchmark measurements.
RFC 7462: URNs for the Alert-Info Header Field of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- L. Liess
- R. Jesske
- A. Johnston
- D. Worley
- P. Kyzivat
- March 2015
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by the User Agent (UA) as an alerting signal (e.g., a ring tone or ringback tone) when the user is alerted. This is done using the Alert-Info header field. However, the reference (typically a URL) addresses only a specific network resource with specific rendering properties. There is currently no support for standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without being tied to a particular rendering. To overcome these limitations and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in Alert-Info header fields (and situations with similar requirements) is defined in this specification.
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, which defines the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It changes the usage of the Alert-Info header field defined in RFC 3261 by additionally allowing its use in any non-100 provisional response to INVITE. This document also permits proxies to add or remove an Alert-Info header field and to add or remove Alert-Info header field values.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by the User Agent (UA) as an alerting signal (e.g., a ring tone or ringback tone) when the user is alerted. This is done using the Alert-Info header field. However, the reference (typically a URL) addresses only a specific network resource with specific rendering properties. There is currently no support for standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without being tied to a particular rendering. To overcome these limitations and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in Alert-Info header fields (and situations with similar requirements) is defined in this specification.
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, which defines the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It changes the usage of the Alert-Info header field defined in RFC 3261 by additionally allowing its use in any non-100 provisional response to INVITE. This document also permits proxies to add or remove an Alert-Info header field and to add or remove Alert-Info header field values.
RFC 7463: Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR)
Proposed Standard- A. Johnston
- M. Soroushnejad
- V. Venkataramanan
- March 2015
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes the requirements and implementation of a group telephony feature commonly known as Bridged Line Appearance (BLA) or Multiple Line Appearance (MLA), or Shared Call/Line Appearance (SCA). When implemented using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), it is referred to as shared appearances of an Address of Record (AOR) since SIP does not have the concept of lines. This feature is commonly offered in IP Centrex services and IP Private Branch Exchange (IPBX) offerings and is likely to be implemented on SIP IP telephones and SIP feature servers used in a business environment. This feature allows several user agents (UAs) to share a common AOR, learn about calls placed and received by other UAs in the group, and pick up or join calls within the group. This document discusses use cases, lists requirements, and defines extensions to implement this feature. This specification updates RFCs 3261 and 4235.
Abstract
This document describes the requirements and implementation of a group telephony feature commonly known as Bridged Line Appearance (BLA) or Multiple Line Appearance (MLA), or Shared Call/Line Appearance (SCA). When implemented using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), it is referred to as shared appearances of an Address of Record (AOR) since SIP does not have the concept of lines. This feature is commonly offered in IP Centrex services and IP Private Branch Exchange (IPBX) offerings and is likely to be implemented on SIP IP telephones and SIP feature servers used in a business environment. This feature allows several user agents (UAs) to share a common AOR, learn about calls placed and received by other UAs in the group, and pick up or join calls within the group. This document discusses use cases, lists requirements, and defines extensions to implement this feature. This specification updates RFCs 3261 and 4235.
RFC 7415: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Rate Control
Proposed Standard- E. Noel
- P. Williams
- February 2015
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The prevalent use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) in Next Generation Networks necessitates that SIP networks provide adequate control mechanisms to maintain transaction throughput by preventing congestion collapse during traffic overloads. A loss-based solution to remedy known vulnerabilities of the SIP 503 (Service Unavailable) overload control mechanism has already been proposed. Using the same signaling, this document proposes a rate-based control scheme to complement the loss-based control scheme.
Abstract
The prevalent use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) in Next Generation Networks necessitates that SIP networks provide adequate control mechanisms to maintain transaction throughput by preventing congestion collapse during traffic overloads. A loss-based solution to remedy known vulnerabilities of the SIP 503 (Service Unavailable) overload control mechanism has already been proposed. Using the same signaling, this document proposes a rate-based control scheme to complement the loss-based control scheme.
RFC 7433: A Mechanism for Transporting User-to-User Call Control Information in SIP
Proposed Standard- A. Johnston
- J. Rafferty
- January 2015
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
There is a class of applications that benefit from using SIP to exchange User-to-User Information (UUI) data during session establishment. This information, known as call control UUI data, is a small piece of data inserted by an application initiating the session and utilized by an application accepting the session. The syntax and semantics for the UUI data used by a specific application are defined by a UUI package. This UUI data is opaque to SIP and its function is unrelated to any basic SIP function. This document defines a new SIP header field, User-to-User, to transport UUI data, along with an extension mechanism.
Abstract
There is a class of applications that benefit from using SIP to exchange User-to-User Information (UUI) data during session establishment. This information, known as call control UUI data, is a small piece of data inserted by an application initiating the session and utilized by an application accepting the session. The syntax and semantics for the UUI data used by a specific application are defined by a UUI package. This UUI data is opaque to SIP and its function is unrelated to any basic SIP function. This document defines a new SIP header field, User-to-User, to transport UUI data, along with an extension mechanism.
RFC 7434: Interworking ISDN Call Control User Information with SIP
Proposed Standard- K. Drage
- A. Johnston
- January 2015
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The motivation and use cases for interworking and transporting User- to-User Information (UUI) from the ITU-T Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. 1 (DSS1) User-user information element within SIP are described in RFC 6567. As networks move to SIP, it is important that applications requiring this data can continue to function in SIP networks as well as have the ability to interwork with this ISDN service for end-to-end transparency. This document defines a usage (a new package called the ISDN UUI package) of the User-to-User header field to enable interworking with this ISDN service.
This document covers interworking with both public ISDN and private ISDN capabilities, so the potential interworking with QSIG will also be addressed.
The package is identified by the new value "isdn-uui" of the "purpose" header field parameter.
Abstract
The motivation and use cases for interworking and transporting User- to-User Information (UUI) from the ITU-T Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. 1 (DSS1) User-user information element within SIP are described in RFC 6567. As networks move to SIP, it is important that applications requiring this data can continue to function in SIP networks as well as have the ability to interwork with this ISDN service for end-to-end transparency. This document defines a usage (a new package called the ISDN UUI package) of the User-to-User header field to enable interworking with this ISDN service.
This document covers interworking with both public ISDN and private ISDN capabilities, so the potential interworking with QSIG will also be addressed.
The package is identified by the new value "isdn-uui" of the "purpose" header field parameter.
RFC 7403: A Media-Based Traceroute Function for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- H. Kaplan
- November 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
SIP already provides the ability to perform hop-by-hop traceroute for SIP messages using the Max-Forwards header field to determine the reachability path of requests to a target. A mechanism for media-loopback calls has also been defined separately, which enables test calls to be generated that result in media being looped back to the originator. This document describes a means of performing hop-by-hop traceroute-style test calls using the media-loopback mechanism to test the media path when SIP sessions go through media-relaying back-to-back user agents (B2BUAs).
Abstract
SIP already provides the ability to perform hop-by-hop traceroute for SIP messages using the Max-Forwards header field to determine the reachability path of requests to a target. A mechanism for media-loopback calls has also been defined separately, which enables test calls to be generated that result in media being looped back to the originator. This document describes a means of performing hop-by-hop traceroute-style test calls using the media-loopback mechanism to test the media path when SIP sessions go through media-relaying back-to-back user agents (B2BUAs).
RFC 7339: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Overload Control
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- V. Hilt
- H. Schulzrinne
- September 2014
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when SIP servers have insufficient resources to handle all the SIP messages they receive. Even though the SIP protocol provides a limited overload control mechanism through its 503 (Service Unavailable) response code, SIP servers are still vulnerable to overload. This document defines the behavior of SIP servers involved in overload control and also specifies a loss-based overload scheme for SIP.
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when SIP servers have insufficient resources to handle all the SIP messages they receive. Even though the SIP protocol provides a limited overload control mechanism through its 503 (Service Unavailable) response code, SIP servers are still vulnerable to overload. This document defines the behavior of SIP servers involved in overload control and also specifies a loss-based overload scheme for SIP.
RFC 7355: Indicating WebSocket Protocol as a Transport in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF)
Informational- G. Salgueiro
- V. Pascual
- A. Roman
- S. Garcia
- September 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
RFC 7118 specifies a WebSocket subprotocol as a reliable real-time transport mechanism between Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities to enable usage of SIP in web-oriented deployments. This document updates the SIP Common Log Format (CLF), defined in RFC 6873, with a new "Transport Flag" for such SIP WebSocket transport.
Abstract
RFC 7118 specifies a WebSocket subprotocol as a reliable real-time transport mechanism between Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities to enable usage of SIP in web-oriented deployments. This document updates the SIP Common Log Format (CLF), defined in RFC 6873, with a new "Transport Flag" for such SIP WebSocket transport.
RFC 7329: A Session Identifier for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- H. Kaplan
- August 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
There is a need for having a globally unique session identifier for the same SIP session that can be consistently maintained across SIP Proxies, Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs), and other SIP middleboxes, for the purpose of troubleshooting. This document proposes a new SIP header to carry such a value: Session-ID.
The mechanism defined in this document has been widely deployed, and is being followed in a backward-compatible fashion for a new Standards Track document produced by the INSIPID Working Group.
- Obsoleted by RFC 7989
Abstract
There is a need for having a globally unique session identifier for the same SIP session that can be consistently maintained across SIP Proxies, Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs), and other SIP middleboxes, for the purpose of troubleshooting. This document proposes a new SIP header to carry such a value: Session-ID.
The mechanism defined in this document has been widely deployed, and is being followed in a backward-compatible fashion for a new Standards Track document produced by the INSIPID Working Group.
RFC 7345: UDP Transport Layer (UDPTL) over Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- I. Sedlacek
- G. Salgueiro
- August 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies how the UDP Transport Layer (UDPTL) protocol, the predominant transport protocol for T.38 fax, can be transported over the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol, how the usage of UDPTL over DTLS is indicated in the Session Description Protocol (SDP), and how UDPTL over DTLS is negotiated in a session established using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
Abstract
This document specifies how the UDP Transport Layer (UDPTL) protocol, the predominant transport protocol for T.38 fax, can be transported over the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol, how the usage of UDPTL over DTLS is indicated in the Session Description Protocol (SDP), and how UDPTL over DTLS is negotiated in a session established using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
RFC 7332: Loop Detection Mechanisms for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs)
Proposed Standard- H. Kaplan
- V. Pascual
- August 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
SIP Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) can cause unending SIP request routing loops because, as User Agent Clients, they can generate SIP requests with new Max-Forwards values. This document discusses the difficulties associated with loop detection for B2BUAs and the requirements for them to prevent infinite loops.
Abstract
SIP Back-to-Back User Agents (B2BUAs) can cause unending SIP request routing loops because, as User Agent Clients, they can generate SIP requests with new Max-Forwards values. This document discusses the difficulties associated with loop detection for B2BUAs and the requirements for them to prevent infinite loops.
RFC 7316: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Private-Network-Indication Private Header (P-Header)
Informational- J. van Elburg
- K. Drage
- M. Ohsugi
- S. Schubert
- K. Arai
- July 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Private-Network-Indication P-header used by the 3GPP. The P-Private-Network-Indication indicates that the message is part of the message traffic of a private network and identifies that private network. A private network indication allows nodes to treat private network traffic according to a different set of rules than the set applicable to public network traffic.
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Private-Network-Indication P-header used by the 3GPP. The P-Private-Network-Indication indicates that the message is part of the message traffic of a private network and identifies that private network. A private network indication allows nodes to treat private network traffic according to a different set of rules than the set applicable to public network traffic.
RFC 7315: Private Header (P-Header) Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for the 3GPP
Informational- R. Jesske
- K. Drage
- C. Holmberg
- July 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes a set of private header (P-header) Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) fields used by the 3GPP, along with their applicability, which is limited to particular environments. The P-header fields are used for a variety of purposes within the networks that the partners implement, including charging and information about the networks a call traverses. This document obsoletes RFC 3455.
Abstract
This document describes a set of private header (P-header) Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) fields used by the 3GPP, along with their applicability, which is limited to particular environments. The P-header fields are used for a variety of purposes within the networks that the partners implement, including charging and information about the networks a call traverses. This document obsoletes RFC 3455.
RFC 7247: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Architecture, Addresses, and Error Handling
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- A. Houri
- J. Hildebrand
- May 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
As a foundation for the definition of bidirectional protocol mappings between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), this document specifies the architectural assumptions underlying such mappings as well as the mapping of addresses and error conditions.
Abstract
As a foundation for the definition of bidirectional protocol mappings between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), this document specifies the architectural assumptions underlying such mappings as well as the mapping of addresses and error conditions.
RFC 7248: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Presence
Proposed Standard- P. Saint-Andre
- A. Houri
- J. Hildebrand
- May 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of presence information between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
- Obsoleted by RFC 8048
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the exchange of presence information between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
RFC 7255: Using the International Mobile station Equipment Identity (IMEI) Uniform Resource Name (URN) as an Instance ID
Informational- A. Allen
- May 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
This specification defines how the Uniform Resource Name (URN) reserved for the Global System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) identities and its sub-namespace for the International Mobile station Equipment Identity (IMEI) can be used as an instance-id. Its purpose is to fulfill the requirements for defining how a specific URN needs to be constructed and used in the '+sip.instance' Contact header field parameter for outbound behavior.
Abstract
This specification defines how the Uniform Resource Name (URN) reserved for the Global System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) identities and its sub-namespace for the International Mobile station Equipment Identity (IMEI) can be used as an instance-id. Its purpose is to fulfill the requirements for defining how a specific URN needs to be constructed and used in the '+sip.instance' Contact header field parameter for outbound behavior.
RFC 7135: Registering a SIP Resource Priority Header Field Namespace for Local Emergency Communications
Informational- J. Polk
- May 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document creates the new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header field namespace 'esnet' and registers this namespace with IANA. The new header field namespace allows for local emergency session establishment to a public safety answering point (PSAP), between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first responders and their organizations.
Abstract
This document creates the new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header field namespace 'esnet' and registers this namespace with IANA. The new header field namespace allows for local emergency session establishment to a public safety answering point (PSAP), between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first responders and their organizations.
RFC 7206: Requirements for an End-to-End Session Identification in IP-Based Multimedia Communication Networks
Informational- P. Jones
- G. Salgueiro
- J. Polk
- L. Liess
- H. Kaplan
- May 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies the requirements for an end-to-end session identifier in IP-based multimedia communication networks. This identifier would enable endpoints, intermediate devices, and management and monitoring systems to identify a session end-to-end across multiple SIP devices, hops, and administrative domains.
Abstract
This document specifies the requirements for an end-to-end session identifier in IP-based multimedia communication networks. This identifier would enable endpoints, intermediate devices, and management and monitoring systems to identify a session end-to-end across multiple SIP devices, hops, and administrative domains.
RFC 7200: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Load-Control Event Package
Proposed Standard- C. Shen
- H. Schulzrinne
- A. Koike
- April 2014
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines a load-control event package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It allows SIP entities to distribute load-filtering policies to other SIP entities in the network. The load-filtering policies contain rules to throttle calls from a specific user or based on their source or destination domain, telephone number prefix. The mechanism helps to prevent signaling overload and complements feedback-based SIP overload control efforts.
Abstract
This specification defines a load-control event package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It allows SIP entities to distribute load-filtering policies to other SIP entities in the network. The load-filtering policies contain rules to throttle calls from a specific user or based on their source or destination domain, telephone number prefix. The mechanism helps to prevent signaling overload and complements feedback-based SIP overload control efforts.
RFC 7090: Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Callback
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- H. Tschofenig
- C. Holmberg
- M. Patel
- April 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
After an emergency call is completed (terminated either prematurely by the emergency caller or normally by the call taker), the call taker may feel the need for further communication. For example, the call may have been dropped by accident without the call taker having sufficient information about the current state of an accident victim. A call taker may trigger a callback to the emergency caller using the contact information provided with the initial emergency call. This callback could, under certain circumstances, be treated like any other call and, as a consequence, it may get blocked by authorization policies or may get forwarded to an answering machine.
The IETF emergency services architecture specification already offers a solution approach for allowing Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) callbacks to bypass authorization policies in order to reach the caller without unnecessary delays. Unfortunately, the specified mechanism only supports limited scenarios. This document discusses shortcomings of the current mechanisms and illustrates additional scenarios where better-than-normal call treatment behavior would be desirable. We describe a solution based on a new header field value for the SIP Priority header field, called "psap-callback", to mark PSAP callbacks.
Abstract
After an emergency call is completed (terminated either prematurely by the emergency caller or normally by the call taker), the call taker may feel the need for further communication. For example, the call may have been dropped by accident without the call taker having sufficient information about the current state of an accident victim. A call taker may trigger a callback to the emergency caller using the contact information provided with the initial emergency call. This callback could, under certain circumstances, be treated like any other call and, as a consequence, it may get blocked by authorization policies or may get forwarded to an answering machine.
The IETF emergency services architecture specification already offers a solution approach for allowing Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) callbacks to bypass authorization policies in order to reach the caller without unnecessary delays. Unfortunately, the specified mechanism only supports limited scenarios. This document discusses shortcomings of the current mechanisms and illustrates additional scenarios where better-than-normal call treatment behavior would be desirable. We describe a solution based on a new header field value for the SIP Priority header field, called "psap-callback", to mark PSAP callbacks.
RFC 7163: URN for Country-Specific Emergency Services
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- I. Sedlacek
- March 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document updates the registration guidance provided in Section 4.2 of RFC 5031, which allows the registration of service URNs with the 'sos' service type only for emergency services "that are offered widely and in different countries". This document updates those instructions to allow such registrations when, at the time of registration, those services are offered in only one country.
Abstract
This document updates the registration guidance provided in Section 4.2 of RFC 5031, which allows the registration of service URNs with the 'sos' service type only for emergency services "that are offered widely and in different countries". This document updates those instructions to allow such registrations when, at the time of registration, those services are offered in only one country.
RFC 7131: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) History-Info Header Call Flow Examples
Informational- M. Barnes
- F. Audet
- S. Schubert
- H. van Elburg
- C. Holmberg
- March 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes use cases and documents call flows that require the History-Info header field to capture the Request-URIs as a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Request is retargeted. The use cases are described along with the corresponding call flow diagrams and messaging details.
Abstract
This document describes use cases and documents call flows that require the History-Info header field to capture the Request-URIs as a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Request is retargeted. The use cases are described along with the corresponding call flow diagrams and messaging details.
RFC 7134: The Management Policy of the Resource Priority Header (RPH) Registry Changed to "IETF Review"
Proposed Standard- B. Rosen
- March 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
RFC 4412 defines the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registries. The management policy of these registries is "Standards Action". This document normatively updates RFC 4412 to change the management policy of these registries to "IETF Review".
Abstract
RFC 4412 defines the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registries. The management policy of these registries is "Standards Action". This document normatively updates RFC 4412 to change the management policy of these registries to "IETF Review".
RFC 7088: Session Initiation Protocol Service Example -- Music on Hold
Informational- D. Worley
- February 2014
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
"Music on hold" is one of the features of telephone systems that is most desired by buyers of business telephone systems. Music on hold means that when one party to a call has the call "on hold", that party's telephone provides an audio stream (often music) to be heard by the other party. Architectural features of SIP make it difficult to implement music on hold in a way that is fully standards-compliant. The implementation of music on hold described in this document is fully effective, is standards-compliant, and has a number of advantages over the methods previously documented. In particular, it is less likely to produce peculiar user interface effects and more likely to work in systems that perform authentication than the music-on-hold method described in Section 2.3 of RFC 5359.
Abstract
"Music on hold" is one of the features of telephone systems that is most desired by buyers of business telephone systems. Music on hold means that when one party to a call has the call "on hold", that party's telephone provides an audio stream (often music) to be heard by the other party. Architectural features of SIP make it difficult to implement music on hold in a way that is fully standards-compliant. The implementation of music on hold described in this document is fully effective, is standards-compliant, and has a number of advantages over the methods previously documented. In particular, it is less likely to produce peculiar user interface effects and more likely to work in systems that perform authentication than the music-on-hold method described in Section 2.3 of RFC 5359.
RFC 7044: An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information
Proposed Standard- M. Barnes
- F. Audet
- S. Schubert
- J. van Elburg
- C. Holmberg
- February 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a standard mechanism for capturing the history information associated with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request. This capability enables many enhanced services by providing the information as to how and why a SIP request arrives at a specific application or user. This document defines an optional SIP header field, History-Info, for capturing the history information in requests. The document also defines SIP header field parameters for the History-Info and Contact header fields to tag the method by which the target of a request is determined. In addition, this specification defines a value for the Privacy header field that directs the anonymization of values in the History-Info header field. This document obsoletes RFC 4244.
Abstract
This document defines a standard mechanism for capturing the history information associated with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request. This capability enables many enhanced services by providing the information as to how and why a SIP request arrives at a specific application or user. This document defines an optional SIP header field, History-Info, for capturing the history information in requests. The document also defines SIP header field parameters for the History-Info and Contact header fields to tag the method by which the target of a request is determined. In addition, this specification defines a value for the Privacy header field that directs the anonymization of values in the History-Info header field. This document obsoletes RFC 4244.
RFC 7118: The WebSocket Protocol as a Transport for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- I. Baz Castillo
- J. Millan Villegas
- V. Pascual
- January 2014
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The WebSocket protocol enables two-way real-time communication between clients and servers in web-based applications. This document specifies a WebSocket subprotocol as a reliable transport mechanism between Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities to enable use of SIP in web-oriented deployments.
Abstract
The WebSocket protocol enables two-way real-time communication between clients and servers in web-based applications. This document specifies a WebSocket subprotocol as a reliable transport mechanism between Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities to enable use of SIP in web-oriented deployments.
RFC 7106: A Group Text Chat Purpose for Conference and Service URIs in the SIP Event Package for Conference State
Informational- E. Ivov
- January 2014
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document defines and registers a value of "grouptextchat" ("Group Text Chat") for the URI <purpose> element of SIP's Conference Event Package.
Abstract
This document defines and registers a value of "grouptextchat" ("Group Text Chat") for the URI <purpose> element of SIP's Conference Event Package.
RFC 7092: A Taxonomy of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Back-to-Back User Agents
Informational- H. Kaplan
- V. Pascual
- December 2013
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
In many SIP deployments, SIP entities exist in the SIP signaling path between the originating and final terminating endpoints, which go beyond the definition of a SIP proxy, performing functions not defined in Standards Track RFCs. The only term for such devices provided in RFC 3261 is for a Back-to-Back User Agent (B2BUA), which is defined as the logical concatenation of a SIP User Agent Server (UAS) and User Agent Client (UAC).
There are numerous types of SIP B2BUAs performing different roles in different ways; for example, IP Private Branch Exchanges (IPBXs), Session Border Controllers (SBCs), and Application Servers (ASs). This document identifies several common B2BUA roles in order to provide taxonomy other documents can use and reference.
Abstract
In many SIP deployments, SIP entities exist in the SIP signaling path between the originating and final terminating endpoints, which go beyond the definition of a SIP proxy, performing functions not defined in Standards Track RFCs. The only term for such devices provided in RFC 3261 is for a Back-to-Back User Agent (B2BUA), which is defined as the logical concatenation of a SIP User Agent Server (UAS) and User Agent Client (UAC).
There are numerous types of SIP B2BUAs performing different roles in different ways; for example, IP Private Branch Exchanges (IPBXs), Session Border Controllers (SBCs), and Application Servers (ASs). This document identifies several common B2BUA roles in order to provide taxonomy other documents can use and reference.
RFC 7081: CUSAX: Combined Use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)
Informational- E. Ivov
- P. Saint-Andre
- E. Marocco
- November 2013
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
This document suggests some strategies for the combined use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) both in user-oriented clients and in deployed servers. Such strategies, which mainly consist of configuration changes and minimal software modifications to existing clients and servers, aim to provide a single, full-featured, real-time communication service by using complementary subsets of features from SIP and from XMPP. Typically, such subsets consist of telephony capabilities from SIP and instant messaging and presence capabilities from XMPP. This document does not define any new protocols or syntax for either SIP or XMPP and, by intent, does not attempt to standardize "best current practices". Instead, it merely aims to provide practical guidance to those who are interested in the combined use of SIP and XMPP for real-time communication.
Abstract
This document suggests some strategies for the combined use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) both in user-oriented clients and in deployed servers. Such strategies, which mainly consist of configuration changes and minimal software modifications to existing clients and servers, aim to provide a single, full-featured, real-time communication service by using complementary subsets of features from SIP and from XMPP. Typically, such subsets consist of telephony capabilities from SIP and instant messaging and presence capabilities from XMPP. This document does not define any new protocols or syntax for either SIP or XMPP and, by intent, does not attempt to standardize "best current practices". Instead, it merely aims to provide practical guidance to those who are interested in the combined use of SIP and XMPP for real-time communication.
RFC 6993: Instant Messaging and Presence Purpose for the Call-Info Header Field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- P. Saint-Andre
- July 2013
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
This document defines and registers a value of "impp" ("instant messaging and presence protocol") for the "purpose" header field parameter of the Call-Info header field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
Abstract
This document defines and registers a value of "impp" ("instant messaging and presence protocol") for the "purpose" header field parameter of the Call-Info header field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
RFC 6910: Completion of Calls for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- D. Worley
- M. Huelsemann
- R. Jesske
- D. Alexeitsev
- April 2013
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The "completion of calls" feature defined in this specification allows the caller of a failed call to be notified when the callee becomes available to receive a call.
For the realization of a basic solution without queuing, this document references the usage of the dialog event package (RFC 4235) that is described as 'Automatic Redial' in "Session Initiation Protocol Service Examples" (RFC 5359).
For the realization of a more comprehensive solution with queuing, this document introduces an architecture for implementing these features in the Session Initiation Protocol where "completion of calls" implementations associated with the caller's and callee's endpoints cooperate to place the caller's request for completion of calls into a queue at the callee's endpoint; when a caller's request is ready to be serviced, re-attempt of the original, failed call is then made.
The architecture is designed to interoperate well with existing completion of calls solutions in other networks.
Abstract
The "completion of calls" feature defined in this specification allows the caller of a failed call to be notified when the callee becomes available to receive a call.
For the realization of a basic solution without queuing, this document references the usage of the dialog event package (RFC 4235) that is described as 'Automatic Redial' in "Session Initiation Protocol Service Examples" (RFC 5359).
For the realization of a more comprehensive solution with queuing, this document introduces an architecture for implementing these features in the Session Initiation Protocol where "completion of calls" implementations associated with the caller's and callee's endpoints cooperate to place the caller's request for completion of calls into a queue at the callee's endpoint; when a caller's request is ready to be serviced, re-attempt of the original, failed call is then made.
The architecture is designed to interoperate well with existing completion of calls solutions in other networks.
RFC 6913: Indicating Fax over IP Capability in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- D. Hanes
- G. Salgueiro
- K. Fleming
- March 2013
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document defines and registers with IANA the new "fax" media feature tag for use with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Currently, fax calls are indistinguishable from voice calls at call initiation. Consequently, fax calls can be routed to SIP user agents that are not fax capable. A "fax" media feature tag implemented in conjunction with caller preferences allows for more accurate fax call routing.
Abstract
This document defines and registers with IANA the new "fax" media feature tag for use with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Currently, fax calls are indistinguishable from voice calls at call initiation. Consequently, fax calls can be routed to SIP user agents that are not fax capable. A "fax" media feature tag implemented in conjunction with caller preferences allows for more accurate fax call routing.
RFC 6881: BCP 181: Best Current Practice for Communications Services in Support of Emergency Calling
Best Current Practice- B. Rosen
- J. Polk
- March 2013
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The IETF and other standards organizations have efforts targeted at standardizing various aspects of placing emergency calls on IP networks. This memo describes best current practice on how devices, networks, and services using IETF protocols should use such standards to make emergency calls.
Abstract
The IETF and other standards organizations have efforts targeted at standardizing various aspects of placing emergency calls on IP networks. This memo describes best current practice on how devices, networks, and services using IETF protocols should use such standards to make emergency calls.
RFC 6878: IANA Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Priority" Header Field
Proposed Standard- A.B. Roach
- March 2013
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a new IANA registry to keep track of the values defined for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Priority" header field. It updates RFC 3261.
Abstract
This document defines a new IANA registry to keep track of the values defined for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Priority" header field. It updates RFC 3261.
RFC 6872: The Common Log Format (CLF) for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP): Framework and Information Model
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- E. Burger
- T. Anjali
- H. Abdelnur
- O. Festor
- February 2013
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Well-known web servers such as Apache and web proxies like Squid support event logging using a common log format. The logs produced using these de facto standard formats are invaluable to system administrators for troubleshooting a server and tool writers to craft tools that mine the log files and produce reports and trends. Furthermore, these log files can also be used to train anomaly detection systems and feed events into a security event management system. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) does not have a common log format, and, as a result, each server supports a distinct log format that makes it unnecessarily complex to produce tools to do trend analysis and security detection. This document describes a framework, including requirements and analysis of existing approaches, and specifies an information model for development of a SIP common log file format that can be used uniformly by user agents, proxies, registrars, and redirect servers as well as back-to-back user agents.
Abstract
Well-known web servers such as Apache and web proxies like Squid support event logging using a common log format. The logs produced using these de facto standard formats are invaluable to system administrators for troubleshooting a server and tool writers to craft tools that mine the log files and produce reports and trends. Furthermore, these log files can also be used to train anomaly detection systems and feed events into a security event management system. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) does not have a common log format, and, as a result, each server supports a distinct log format that makes it unnecessarily complex to produce tools to do trend analysis and security detection. This document describes a framework, including requirements and analysis of existing approaches, and specifies an information model for development of a SIP common log file format that can be used uniformly by user agents, proxies, registrars, and redirect servers as well as back-to-back user agents.
RFC 6873: Format for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF)
Proposed Standard- G. Salgueiro
- V. Gurbani
- A. B. Roach
- February 2013
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The SIPCLF working group has defined a Common Log Format (CLF) framework for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) servers. This CLF mimics the successful event logging format found in well-known web servers like Apache and web proxies like Squid. This document proposes an indexed text encoding format for the SIP CLF that retains the key advantages of a text-based format while significantly increasing processing performance over a purely text-based implementation. This file format adheres to the SIP CLF information model and provides an effective encoding scheme for all mandatory and optional fields that appear in a SIP CLF record.
Abstract
The SIPCLF working group has defined a Common Log Format (CLF) framework for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) servers. This CLF mimics the successful event logging format found in well-known web servers like Apache and web proxies like Squid. This document proposes an indexed text encoding format for the SIP CLF that retains the key advantages of a text-based format while significantly increasing processing performance over a purely text-based implementation. This file format adheres to the SIP CLF information model and provides an effective encoding scheme for all mandatory and optional fields that appear in a SIP CLF record.
RFC 6794: A Framework for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Session Policies
Proposed Standard- V. Hilt
- G. Camarillo
- J. Rosenberg
- December 2012
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Proxy servers play a central role as an intermediary in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as they define and impact policies on call routing, rendezvous, and other call features. This document specifies a framework for SIP session policies that provides a standard mechanism by which a proxy can define or influence policies on sessions, such as the codecs or media types to be used. It defines a model, an overall architecture and new protocol mechanisms for session policies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Proxy servers play a central role as an intermediary in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as they define and impact policies on call routing, rendezvous, and other call features. This document specifies a framework for SIP session policies that provides a standard mechanism by which a proxy can define or influence policies on sessions, such as the codecs or media types to be used. It defines a model, an overall architecture and new protocol mechanisms for session policies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6795: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Session-Specific Policies
Proposed Standard- V. Hilt
- G. Camarillo
- December 2012
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for session-specific policies. This event package enables user agents (UAs) to subscribe to session policies for a SIP session and to receive notifications if these policies change. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for session-specific policies. This event package enables user agents (UAs) to subscribe to session policies for a SIP session and to receive notifications if these policies change. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6796: A User Agent Profile Data Set for Media Policy
Proposed Standard- V. Hilt
- G. Camarillo
- J. Rosenberg
- D. Worley
- December 2012
- IETF publication
Abstract
This specification defines an XML document format to describe the media properties of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) sessions. Examples for media properties are the codecs or media types used in the session. This document also defines an XML document format to describe policies that limit the media properties of SIP sessions. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines an XML document format to describe the media properties of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) sessions. Examples for media properties are the codecs or media types used in the session. This document also defines an XML document format to describe policies that limit the media properties of SIP sessions. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6809: Mechanism to Indicate Support of Features and Capabilities in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- I. Sedlacek
- H. Kaplan
- November 2012
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This specification defines a new SIP header field, Feature-Caps. The Feature-Caps header field conveys feature-capability indicators that are used to indicate support of features and capabilities for SIP entities that are not represented by the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) of the Contact header field.
SIP entities that are represented by the URI of the SIP Contact header field can convey media feature tags in the Contact header field to indicate support of features and capabilities.
This specification also defines feature-capability indicators and creates a new IANA registry, "Proxy-Feature Feature-Capability Indicator Trees", for registering feature-capability indicators. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines a new SIP header field, Feature-Caps. The Feature-Caps header field conveys feature-capability indicators that are used to indicate support of features and capabilities for SIP entities that are not represented by the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) of the Contact header field.
SIP entities that are represented by the URI of the SIP Contact header field can convey media feature tags in the Contact header field to indicate support of features and capabilities.
This specification also defines feature-capability indicators and creates a new IANA registry, "Proxy-Feature Feature-Capability Indicator Trees", for registering feature-capability indicators. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6665: SIP-Specific Event Notification
Proposed Standard- A.B. Roach
- July 2012
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) defined by RFC 3261. The purpose of this extension is to provide an extensible framework by which SIP nodes can request notification from remote nodes indicating that certain events have occurred.
Note that the event notification mechanisms defined herein are NOT intended to be a general-purpose infrastructure for all classes of event subscription and notification.
This document represents a backwards-compatible improvement on the original mechanism described by RFC 3265, taking into account several years of implementation experience. Accordingly, this document obsoletes RFC 3265. This document also updates RFC 4660 slightly to accommodate some small changes to the mechanism that were discussed in that document. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) defined by RFC 3261. The purpose of this extension is to provide an extensible framework by which SIP nodes can request notification from remote nodes indicating that certain events have occurred.
Note that the event notification mechanisms defined herein are NOT intended to be a general-purpose infrastructure for all classes of event subscription and notification.
This document represents a backwards-compatible improvement on the original mechanism described by RFC 3265, taking into account several years of implementation experience. Accordingly, this document obsoletes RFC 3265. This document also updates RFC 4660 slightly to accommodate some small changes to the mechanism that were discussed in that document. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6567: Problem Statement and Requirements for Transporting User-to-User Call Control Information in SIP
Informational- A. Johnston
- L. Liess
- April 2012
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document introduces the transport of call control User-to-User Information (UUI) using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and develops several requirements for a new SIP mechanism. Some SIP sessions are established by or related to a non-SIP application. This application may have information that needs to be transported between the SIP User Agents during session establishment. In addition to interworking with the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) UUI Service, this extension will also be used for native SIP endpoints requiring application UUI. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document introduces the transport of call control User-to-User Information (UUI) using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and develops several requirements for a new SIP mechanism. Some SIP sessions are established by or related to a non-SIP application. This application may have information that needs to be transported between the SIP User Agents during session establishment. In addition to interworking with the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) UUI Service, this extension will also be used for native SIP endpoints requiring application UUI. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6468: Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE
Proposed Standard- A. Melnikov
- B. Leiba
- K. Li
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Applications Area
Abstract
This document describes a profile of the Sieve extension for notifications, to allow notifications to be sent over SIP MESSAGE. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a profile of the Sieve extension for notifications, to allow notifications to be sent over SIP MESSAGE. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6446: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for Notification Rate Control
Proposed Standard- A. Niemi
- K. Kiss
- S. Loreto
- January 2012
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document specifies mechanisms for adjusting the rate of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event notifications. These mechanisms can be applied in subscriptions to all SIP event packages. This document updates RFC 3265. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies mechanisms for adjusting the rate of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event notifications. These mechanisms can be applied in subscriptions to all SIP event packages. This document updates RFC 3265. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6447: Filtering Location Notifications in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- R. Mahy
- B. Rosen
- H. Tschofenig
- January 2012
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes filters that limit asynchronous location notifications to compelling events. These filters are designed as an extension to RFC 4661, an XML-based format for event notification filtering, and based on RFC 3856, the SIP presence event package. The resulting location information is conveyed in existing location formats wrapped in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes filters that limit asynchronous location notifications to compelling events. These filters are designed as an extension to RFC 4661, an XML-based format for event notification filtering, and based on RFC 3856, the SIP presence event package. The resulting location information is conveyed in existing location formats wrapped in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6442: Location Conveyance for the Session Initiation Protocol
Proposed Standard- J. Polk
- B. Rosen
- J. Peterson
- December 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to convey geographic location information from one SIP entity to another SIP entity. The SIP extension covers end-to-end conveyance as well as location-based routing, where SIP intermediaries make routing decisions based upon the location of the Location Target. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to convey geographic location information from one SIP entity to another SIP entity. The SIP extension covers end-to-end conveyance as well as location-based routing, where SIP intermediaries make routing decisions based upon the location of the Location Target. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6432: Carrying Q.850 Codes in Reason Header Fields in SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Responses
Proposed Standard- R. Jesske
- L. Liess
- November 2011
- IETF publication
Abstract
Although the use of the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Reason header field in responses is considered in general in RFC 3326, its use is not specified for any particular response code. Nonetheless, existing deployments have been using Reason header fields to carry failure-related Q.850 cause codes in SIP responses to INVITE requests that have been gatewayed to Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) systems. This document normatively describes the use of the Reason header field in carrying Q.850 cause codes in SIP responses. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Although the use of the SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Reason header field in responses is considered in general in RFC 3326, its use is not specified for any particular response code. Nonetheless, existing deployments have been using Reason header fields to carry failure-related Q.850 cause codes in SIP responses to INVITE requests that have been gatewayed to Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) systems. This document normatively describes the use of the Reason header field in carrying Q.850 cause codes in SIP responses. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6357: Design Considerations for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Overload Control
Informational- V. Hilt
- E. Noel
- C. Shen
- A. Abdelal
- August 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when SIP servers have insufficient resources to handle all SIP messages they receive. Even though the SIP protocol provides a limited overload control mechanism through its 503 (Service Unavailable) response code, SIP servers are still vulnerable to overload. This document discusses models and design considerations for a SIP overload control mechanism. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when SIP servers have insufficient resources to handle all SIP messages they receive. Even though the SIP protocol provides a limited overload control mechanism through its 503 (Service Unavailable) response code, SIP servers are still vulnerable to overload. This document discusses models and design considerations for a SIP overload control mechanism. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6337: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Usage of the Offer/Answer Model
Informational- S. Okumura
- T. Sawada
- P. Kyzivat
- August 2011
- IETF publication
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) utilizes the offer/answer model to establish and update multimedia sessions using the Session Description Protocol (SDP). The description of the offer/answer model in SIP is dispersed across multiple RFCs. This document summarizes all the current usages of the offer/answer model in SIP communication. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) utilizes the offer/answer model to establish and update multimedia sessions using the Session Description Protocol (SDP). The description of the offer/answer model in SIP is dispersed across multiple RFCs. This document summarizes all the current usages of the offer/answer model in SIP communication. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6314: NAT Traversal Practices for Client-Server SIP
Informational- C. Boulton
- J. Rosenberg
- G. Camarillo
- F. Audet
- July 2011
- IETF publication
Abstract
Traversal of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the sessions it establishes through Network Address Translators (NATs) is a complex problem. Currently, there are many deployment scenarios and traversal mechanisms for media traffic. This document provides concrete recommendations and a unified method for NAT traversal as well as documents corresponding flows. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
Traversal of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the sessions it establishes through Network Address Translators (NATs) is a complex problem. Currently, there are many deployment scenarios and traversal mechanisms for media traffic. This document provides concrete recommendations and a unified method for NAT traversal as well as documents corresponding flows. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6228: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Response Code for Indication of Terminated Dialog
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- May 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) response code, 199 Early Dialog Terminated, that a SIP forking proxy and a User Agent Server (UAS) can use to indicate to upstream SIP entities (including the User Agent Client (UAC)) that an early dialog has been terminated, before a final response is sent towards the SIP entities. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) response code, 199 Early Dialog Terminated, that a SIP forking proxy and a User Agent Server (UAS) can use to indicate to upstream SIP entities (including the User Agent Client (UAC)) that an early dialog has been terminated, before a final response is sent towards the SIP entities. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6157: IPv6 Transition in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- K. El Malki
- V. Gurbani
- April 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how the IPv4 Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agents can communicate with IPv6 SIP user agents (and vice versa) at the signaling layer as well as exchange media once the session has been successfully set up. Both single- and dual-stack (i.e., IPv4-only and IPv4/IPv6) user agents are considered. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes how the IPv4 Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agents can communicate with IPv6 SIP user agents (and vice versa) at the signaling layer as well as exchange media once the session has been successfully set up. Both single- and dual-stack (i.e., IPv4-only and IPv4/IPv6) user agents are considered. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6223: Indication of Support for Keep-Alive
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- April 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Via header field parameter, "keep", which allows adjacent SIP entities to explicitly negotiate usage of the Network Address Translation (NAT) keep-alive mechanisms defined in SIP Outbound, in cases where SIP Outbound is not supported, cannot be applied, or where usage of keep-alives is not implicitly negotiated as part of the SIP Outbound negotiation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines a new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Via header field parameter, "keep", which allows adjacent SIP entities to explicitly negotiate usage of the Network Address Translation (NAT) keep-alive mechanisms defined in SIP Outbound, in cases where SIP Outbound is not supported, cannot be applied, or where usage of keep-alives is not implicitly negotiated as part of the SIP Outbound negotiation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6193: Media Description for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE) in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)
Informational- M. Saito
- D. Wing
- M. Toyama
- April 2011
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document specifies how to establish a media session that represents a virtual private network using the Session Initiation Protocol for the purpose of on-demand media/application sharing between peers. It extends the protocol identifier of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) so that it can negotiate use of the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE) for media sessions in the SDP offer/answer model. It also specifies a method to boot up IKE and generate IPsec security associations using a self-signed certificate. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document specifies how to establish a media session that represents a virtual private network using the Session Initiation Protocol for the purpose of on-demand media/application sharing between peers. It extends the protocol identifier of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) so that it can negotiate use of the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE) for media sessions in the SDP offer/answer model. It also specifies a method to boot up IKE and generate IPsec security associations using a self-signed certificate. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6216: Example Call Flows Using Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Security Mechanisms
Informational- C. Jennings
- K. Ono
- R. Sparks
- B. Hibbard
- April 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document shows example call flows demonstrating the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS), and Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It also provides information that helps implementers build interoperable SIP software. To help facilitate interoperability testing, it includes certificates used in the example call flows and processes to create certificates for testing. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document shows example call flows demonstrating the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS), and Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It also provides information that helps implementers build interoperable SIP software. To help facilitate interoperability testing, it includes certificates used in the example call flows and processes to create certificates for testing. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6080: A Framework for Session Initiation Protocol User Agent Profile Delivery
Proposed Standard- D. Petrie
- S. Channabasappa
- March 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies a framework to enable configuration of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agents (UAs) in SIP deployments. The framework provides a means to deliver profile data that user agents need to be functional, automatically and with minimal or no User and Administrative intervention. The framework describes how SIP user agents can discover sources, request profiles, and receive notifications related to profile modifications. As part of this framework, a new SIP event package is defined for notification of profile changes. The framework provides minimal data retrieval options to ensure interoperability. The framework does not include specification of the profile data within its scope. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies a framework to enable configuration of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agents (UAs) in SIP deployments. The framework provides a means to deliver profile data that user agents need to be functional, automatically and with minimal or no User and Administrative intervention. The framework describes how SIP user agents can discover sources, request profiles, and receive notifications related to profile modifications. As part of this framework, a new SIP event package is defined for notification of profile changes. The framework provides minimal data retrieval options to ensure interoperability. The framework does not include specification of the profile data within its scope. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6140: Registration for Multiple Phone Numbers in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- A.B. Roach
- March 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a mechanism by which a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) server acting as a traditional Private Branch Exchange (PBX) can register with a SIP Service Provider (SSP) to receive phone calls for SIP User Agents (UAs). In order to function properly, this mechanism requires that each of the Addresses of Record (AORs) registered in bulk map to a unique set of contacts. This requirement is satisfied by AORs representing phone numbers regardless of the domain, since phone numbers are fully qualified and globally unique. This document therefore focuses on this use case. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a mechanism by which a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) server acting as a traditional Private Branch Exchange (PBX) can register with a SIP Service Provider (SSP) to receive phone calls for SIP User Agents (UAs). In order to function properly, this mechanism requires that each of the Addresses of Record (AORs) registered in bulk map to a unique set of contacts. This requirement is satisfied by AORs representing phone numbers regardless of the domain, since phone numbers are fully qualified and globally unique. This document therefore focuses on this use case. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6141: Re-INVITE and Target-Refresh Request Handling in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- C. Holmberg
- Y. Gao
- March 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The procedures for handling SIP re-INVITEs are described in RFC 3261. Implementation and deployment experience has uncovered a number of issues with the original documentation, and this document provides additional procedures that update the original specification to address those issues. In particular, this document defines in which situations a UAS (User Agent Server) should generate a success response and in which situations a UAS should generate an error response to a re-INVITE. Additionally, this document defines further details of procedures related to target-refresh requests. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The procedures for handling SIP re-INVITEs are described in RFC 3261. Implementation and deployment experience has uncovered a number of issues with the original documentation, and this document provides additional procedures that update the original specification to address those issues. In particular, this document defines in which situations a UAS (User Agent Server) should generate a success response and in which situations a UAS should generate an error response to a re-INVITE. Additionally, this document defines further details of procedures related to target-refresh requests. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6072: Certificate Management Service for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- C. Jennings
- J. Fischl
- February 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a credential service that allows Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agents (UAs) to use a SIP event package to discover the certificates of other users. This mechanism allows User Agents that want to contact a given Address-of-Record (AOR) to retrieve that AOR's certificate by subscribing to the credential service, which returns an authenticated response containing that certificate. The credential service also allows users to store and retrieve their own certificates and private keys. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a credential service that allows Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agents (UAs) to use a SIP event package to discover the certificates of other users. This mechanism allows User Agents that want to contact a given Address-of-Record (AOR) to retrieve that AOR's certificate by subscribing to the credential service, which returns an authenticated response containing that certificate. The credential service also allows users to store and retrieve their own certificates and private keys. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6076: Basic Telephony SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics
Proposed Standard- D. Malas
- A. Morton
- January 2011
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document defines a set of metrics and their usage to evaluate the performance of end-to-end Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for telephony services in both production and testing environments. The purpose of this document is to combine a standard set of common metrics, allowing interoperable performance measurements, easing the comparison of industry implementations. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a set of metrics and their usage to evaluate the performance of end-to-end Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for telephony services in both production and testing environments. The purpose of this document is to combine a standard set of common metrics, allowing interoperable performance measurements, easing the comparison of industry implementations. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6086: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) INFO Method and Package Framework
Proposed Standard- C. Holmberg
- E. Burger
- H. Kaplan
- January 2011
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a method, INFO, for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), and an Info Package mechanism. This document obsoletes RFC 2976. For backward compatibility, this document also specifies a "legacy" mode of usage of the INFO method that is compatible with the usage previously defined in RFC 2976, referred to as "legacy INFO Usage" in this document. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a method, INFO, for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), and an Info Package mechanism. This document obsoletes RFC 2976. For backward compatibility, this document also specifies a "legacy" mode of usage of the INFO method that is compatible with the usage previously defined in RFC 2976, referred to as "legacy INFO Usage" in this document. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6035: Session Initiation Protocol Event Package for Voice Quality Reporting
Proposed Standard- A. Pendleton
- A. Clark
- A. Johnston
- H. Sinnreich
- November 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package that enables the collection and reporting of metrics that measure the quality for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) sessions. Voice call quality information derived from RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP-XR) and call information from SIP is conveyed from a User Agent (UA) in a session, known as a reporter, to a third party, known as a collector. A registration for the application/ vq-rtcpxr media type is also included. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package that enables the collection and reporting of metrics that measure the quality for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) sessions. Voice call quality information derived from RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP-XR) and call information from SIP is conveyed from a User Agent (UA) in a session, known as a reporter, to a third party, known as a collector. A registration for the application/ vq-rtcpxr media type is also included. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6050: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for the Identification of Services
Informational- K. Drage
- November 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that enable a network of trusted SIP servers to assert the service of authenticated users. The use of these extensions is only applicable inside an administrative domain with previously agreed-upon policies for generation, transport, and usage of such information. This document does NOT offer a general service identification model suitable for use between different trust domains or for use in the Internet at large.
The document also defines a URN to identify both services and User Agent (UA) applications. This URN can be used within the SIP header fields defined in this document to identify services, and also within the framework defined for caller preferences and callee capabilities to identify usage of both services and applications between end UAs. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that enable a network of trusted SIP servers to assert the service of authenticated users. The use of these extensions is only applicable inside an administrative domain with previously agreed-upon policies for generation, transport, and usage of such information. This document does NOT offer a general service identification model suitable for use between different trust domains or for use in the Internet at large.
The document also defines a URN to identify both services and User Agent (UA) applications. This URN can be used within the SIP header fields defined in this document to identify services, and also within the framework defined for caller preferences and callee capabilities to identify usage of both services and applications between end UAs. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6044: Mapping and Interworking of Diversion Information between Diversion and History-Info Headers in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- M. Mohali
- October 2010
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Although the SIP History-Info header is the solution adopted in IETF, the non-standard Diversion header is nevertheless widely implemented and used for conveying call-diversion-related information in SIP signaling.
This document describes a recommended interworking guideline between the Diversion header and the History-Info header to handle call diversion information. In addition, an interworking policy is proposed to manage the headers' coexistence. The History-Info header is described in RFC 4244 and the non-standard Diversion header is described, as Historic, in RFC 5806.
Since the Diversion header is used in many existing network implementations for the transport of call diversion information, its interworking with the SIP History-Info standardized solution is needed. This work is intended to enable the migration from non- standard implementations and deployment toward IETF specification- based implementations and deployment. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
- Obsoleted by RFC 7544
Abstract
Although the SIP History-Info header is the solution adopted in IETF, the non-standard Diversion header is nevertheless widely implemented and used for conveying call-diversion-related information in SIP signaling.
This document describes a recommended interworking guideline between the Diversion header and the History-Info header to handle call diversion information. In addition, an interworking policy is proposed to manage the headers' coexistence. The History-Info header is described in RFC 4244 and the non-standard Diversion header is described, as Historic, in RFC 5806.
Since the Diversion header is used in many existing network implementations for the transport of call diversion information, its interworking with the SIP History-Info standardized solution is needed. This work is intended to enable the migration from non- standard implementations and deployment toward IETF specification- based implementations and deployment. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5989: A SIP Event Package for Subscribing to Changes to an HTTP Resource
Proposed Standard- A.B. Roach
- October 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is increasingly being used in systems that are tightly coupled with Hypertext Transport Protocol (HTTP) servers for a variety of reasons. In many of these cases, applications can benefit from being able to discover, in near real- time, when a specific HTTP resource is created, changed, or deleted. This document proposes a mechanism, based on the SIP Event Framework, for doing so. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is increasingly being used in systems that are tightly coupled with Hypertext Transport Protocol (HTTP) servers for a variety of reasons. In many of these cases, applications can benefit from being able to discover, in near real- time, when a specific HTTP resource is created, changed, or deleted. This document proposes a mechanism, based on the SIP Event Framework, for doing so. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6011: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent Configuration
Informational- S. Lawrence
- J. Elwell
- October 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document defines procedures for how a SIP User Agent should locate, retrieve, and maintain current configuration information from a Configuration Service. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document defines procedures for how a SIP User Agent should locate, retrieve, and maintain current configuration information from a Configuration Service. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6026: Correct Transaction Handling for 2xx Responses to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) INVITE Requests
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- T. Zourzouvillys
- September 2010
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), to address an error in the specified handling of success (2xx class) responses to INVITE requests. Elements following RFC 3261 exactly will misidentify retransmissions of the request as a new, unassociated request. The correction involves modifying the INVITE transaction state machines. The correction also changes the way responses that cannot be matched to an existing transaction are handled to address a security risk. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), to address an error in the specified handling of success (2xx class) responses to INVITE requests. Elements following RFC 3261 exactly will misidentify retransmissions of the request as a new, unassociated request. The correction involves modifying the INVITE transaction state machines. The correction also changes the way responses that cannot be matched to an existing transaction are handled to address a security risk. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5947: Requirements for Multiple Address of Record (AOR) Reachability Information in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Elwell
- H. Kaplan
- September 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document states requirements for a standardized SIP registration mechanism for multiple addresses of record (AORs), the mechanism being suitable for deployment by SIP service providers on a large scale in support of small to medium sized Private Branch Exchanges (PBXs). The requirements are for a solution that can, as a minimum, support AORs based on E.164 numbers. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document states requirements for a standardized SIP registration mechanism for multiple addresses of record (AORs), the mechanism being suitable for deployment by SIP service providers on a large scale in support of small to medium sized Private Branch Exchanges (PBXs). The requirements are for a solution that can, as a minimum, support AORs based on E.164 numbers. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5954: Essential Correction for IPv6 ABNF and URI Comparison in RFC 3261
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- B. Carpenter
- B. Tate
- August 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document corrects the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) production rule associated with generating IPv6 literals in RFC 3261. It also clarifies the rule for Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) comparison when the URIs contain textual representation of IP addresses. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document corrects the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) production rule associated with generating IPv6 literals in RFC 3261. It also clarifies the rule for Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) comparison when the URIs contain textual representation of IP addresses. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5898: Connectivity Preconditions for Session Description Protocol (SDP) Media Streams
Proposed Standard- F. Andreasen
- G. Camarillo
- D. Oran
- D. Wing
- July 2010
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
This document defines a new connectivity precondition for the Session Description Protocol (SDP) precondition framework. A connectivity precondition can be used to delay session establishment or modification until media stream connectivity has been successfully verified. The method of verification may vary depending on the type of transport used for the media. For unreliable datagram transports such as UDP, verification involves probing the stream with data or control packets. For reliable connection-oriented transports such as TCP, verification can be achieved simply by successful connection establishment or by probing the connection with data or control packets, depending on the situation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new connectivity precondition for the Session Description Protocol (SDP) precondition framework. A connectivity precondition can be used to delay session establishment or modification until media stream connectivity has been successfully verified. The method of verification may vary depending on the type of transport used for the media. For unreliable datagram transports such as UDP, verification involves probing the stream with data or control packets. For reliable connection-oriented transports such as TCP, verification can be achieved simply by successful connection establishment or by probing the connection with data or control packets, depending on the situation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5922: Domain Certificates in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- S. Lawrence
- A. Jeffrey
- June 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to construct and interpret certain information in a PKIX-compliant (Public Key Infrastructure using X.509) certificate for use in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) over Transport Layer Security (TLS) connection. More specifically, this document describes how to encode and extract the identity of a SIP domain in a certificate and how to use that identity for SIP domain authentication. As such, this document is relevant both to implementors of SIP and to issuers of certificates. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes how to construct and interpret certain information in a PKIX-compliant (Public Key Infrastructure using X.509) certificate for use in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) over Transport Layer Security (TLS) connection. More specifically, this document describes how to encode and extract the identity of a SIP domain in a certificate and how to use that identity for SIP domain authentication. As such, this document is relevant both to implementors of SIP and to issuers of certificates. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5923: Connection Reuse in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- R. Mahy
- B. Tate
- June 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document enables a pair of communicating proxies to reuse a congestion-controlled connection between themselves for sending requests in the forwards and backwards direction. Because the connection is essentially aliased for requests going in the backwards direction, reuse is predicated upon both the communicating endpoints authenticating themselves using X.509 certificates through Transport Layer Security (TLS). For this reason, we only consider connection reuse for TLS over TCP and TLS over Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP). This document also provides guidelines on connection reuse and virtual SIP servers and the interaction of connection reuse and DNS SRV lookups in SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document enables a pair of communicating proxies to reuse a congestion-controlled connection between themselves for sending requests in the forwards and backwards direction. Because the connection is essentially aliased for requests going in the backwards direction, reuse is predicated upon both the communicating endpoints authenticating themselves using X.509 certificates through Transport Layer Security (TLS). For this reason, we only consider connection reuse for TLS over TCP and TLS over Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP). This document also provides guidelines on connection reuse and virtual SIP servers and the interaction of connection reuse and DNS SRV lookups in SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5924: Extended Key Usage (EKU) for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) X.509 Certificates
Experimental- S. Lawrence
- V. Gurbani
- June 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This memo documents an extended key usage (EKU) X.509 certificate extension for restricting the applicability of a certificate to use with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) service. As such, in addition to providing rules for SIP implementations, this memo also provides guidance to issuers of certificates for use with SIP. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.
Abstract
This memo documents an extended key usage (EKU) X.509 certificate extension for restricting the applicability of a certificate to use with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) service. As such, in addition to providing rules for SIP implementations, this memo also provides guidance to issuers of certificates for use with SIP. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community.
RFC 5888: The Session Description Protocol (SDP) Grouping Framework
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- H. Schulzrinne
- June 2010
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
In this specification, we define a framework to group "m" lines in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) for different purposes. This framework uses the "group" and "mid" SDP attributes, both of which are defined in this specification. Additionally, we specify how to use the framework for two different purposes: for lip synchronization and for receiving a media flow consisting of several media streams on different transport addresses. This document obsoletes RFC 3388. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
In this specification, we define a framework to group "m" lines in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) for different purposes. This framework uses the "group" and "mid" SDP attributes, both of which are defined in this specification. Additionally, we specify how to use the framework for two different purposes: for lip synchronization and for receiving a media flow consisting of several media streams on different transport addresses. This document obsoletes RFC 3388. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5897: Identification of Communications Services in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- June 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document considers the problem of service identification in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Service identification is the process of determining the user-level use case that is driving the signaling being utilized by the user agent (UA). This document discusses the uses of service identification, and outlines several architectural principles behind the process. It identifies perils when service identification is not done properly -- including fraud, interoperability failures, and stifling of innovation. It then outlines a set of recommended practices for service identification. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document considers the problem of service identification in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Service identification is the process of determining the user-level use case that is driving the signaling being utilized by the user agent (UA). This document discusses the uses of service identification, and outlines several architectural principles behind the process. It identifies perils when service identification is not done properly -- including fraud, interoperability failures, and stifling of innovation. It then outlines a set of recommended practices for service identification. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5850: A Call Control and Multi-Party Usage Framework for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- R. Mahy
- R. Sparks
- J. Rosenberg
- D. Petrie
- A. Johnston
- May 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a framework and the requirements for call control and multi-party usage of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). To enable discussion of multi-party features and applications, we define an abstract call model for describing the media relationships required by many of these. The model and actions described here are specifically chosen to be independent of the SIP signaling and/or mixing approach chosen to actually set up the media relationships. In addition to its dialog manipulation aspect, this framework includes requirements for communicating related information and events such as conference and session state and session history. This framework also describes other goals that embody the spirit of SIP applications as used on the Internet such as the definition of primitives (not services), invoker and participant oriented primitives, signaling and mixing model independence, and others. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document defines a framework and the requirements for call control and multi-party usage of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). To enable discussion of multi-party features and applications, we define an abstract call model for describing the media relationships required by many of these. The model and actions described here are specifically chosen to be independent of the SIP signaling and/or mixing approach chosen to actually set up the media relationships. In addition to its dialog manipulation aspect, this framework includes requirements for communicating related information and events such as conference and session state and session history. This framework also describes other goals that embody the spirit of SIP applications as used on the Internet such as the definition of primitives (not services), invoker and participant oriented primitives, signaling and mixing model independence, and others. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5875: An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) Diff Event Package
Proposed Standard- J. Urpalainen
- D. Willis
- May 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes an "xcap-diff" SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) event package for the SIP Event Notification Framework, which clients can use to receive notifications of changes to Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) resources. The initial synchronization information exchange and document updates are based on the XCAP Diff format. [STANDARDS TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes an "xcap-diff" SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) event package for the SIP Event Notification Framework, which clients can use to receive notifications of changes to Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) resources. The initial synchronization information exchange and document updates are based on the XCAP Diff format. [STANDARDS TRACK]
RFC 5866: Diameter Quality-of-Service Application
Proposed Standard- D. Sun
- P. McCann
- H. Tschofenig
- T. Tsou
- A. Doria
- G. Zorn
- May 2010
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document describes the framework, messages, and procedures for the Diameter Quality-of-Service (QoS) application. The Diameter QoS application allows network elements to interact with Diameter servers when allocating QoS resources in the network. In particular, two modes of operation, namely "Pull" and "Push", are defined. [STANDARDS TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes the framework, messages, and procedures for the Diameter Quality-of-Service (QoS) application. The Diameter QoS application allows network elements to interact with Diameter servers when allocating QoS resources in the network. In particular, two modes of operation, namely "Pull" and "Push", are defined. [STANDARDS TRACK]
RFC 5763: Framework for Establishing a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) Security Context Using Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)
Proposed Standard- J. Fischl
- H. Tschofenig
- E. Rescorla
- May 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies how to use the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to establish a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) security context using the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol. It describes a mechanism of transporting a fingerprint attribute in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) that identifies the key that will be presented during the DTLS handshake. The key exchange travels along the media path as opposed to the signaling path. The SIP Identity mechanism can be used to protect the integrity of the fingerprint attribute from modification by intermediate proxies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies how to use the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to establish a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) security context using the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol. It describes a mechanism of transporting a fingerprint attribute in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) that identifies the key that will be presented during the DTLS handshake. The key exchange travels along the media path as opposed to the signaling path. The SIP Identity mechanism can be used to protect the integrity of the fingerprint attribute from modification by intermediate proxies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5839: An Extension to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Events for Conditional Event Notification
Proposed Standard- A. Niemi
- D. Willis
- May 2010
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework enables receiving asynchronous notification of various events from other SIP user agents. This framework defines the procedures for creating, refreshing, and terminating subscriptions, as well as fetching and periodic polling of resource state. These procedures provide no tools to avoid replaying event notifications that have already been received by a user agent. This memo defines an extension to SIP events that allows the subscriber to condition the subscription request to whether the state has changed since the previous notification was received. When such a condition is true, either the body of a resulting event notification or the entire notification message is suppressed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework enables receiving asynchronous notification of various events from other SIP user agents. This framework defines the procedures for creating, refreshing, and terminating subscriptions, as well as fetching and periodic polling of resource state. These procedures provide no tools to avoid replaying event notifications that have already been received by a user agent. This memo defines an extension to SIP events that allows the subscriber to condition the subscription request to whether the state has changed since the previous notification was received. When such a condition is true, either the body of a resulting event notification or the entire notification message is suppressed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5767: User-Agent-Driven Privacy Mechanism for SIP
Informational- M. Munakata
- S. Schubert
- T. Ohba
- April 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a guideline for a User Agent (UA) to generate an anonymous Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) message by utilizing mechanisms such as Globally Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) and Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) without the need for a privacy service defined in RFC 3323. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document defines a guideline for a User Agent (UA) to generate an anonymous Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) message by utilizing mechanisms such as Globally Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) and Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) without the need for a privacy service defined in RFC 3323. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5768: Indicating Support for Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- April 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines a media feature tag and an option tag for use with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The media feature tag allows a User Agent (UA) to communicate to its registrar that it supports ICE. The option tag allows a UA to require support for ICE in order for a call to proceed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines a media feature tag and an option tag for use with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The media feature tag allows a User Agent (UA) to communicate to its registrar that it supports ICE. The option tag allows a UA to require support for ICE in order for a call to proceed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5853: Requirements from Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Session Border Control (SBC) Deployments
Informational- J. Hautakorpi
- G. Camarillo
- R. Penfield
- A. Hawrylyshen
- M. Bhatia
- April 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes functions implemented in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) intermediaries known as Session Border Controllers (SBCs). The goal of this document is to describe the commonly provided functions of SBCs. A special focus is given to those practices that are viewed to be in conflict with SIP architectural principles. This document also explores the underlying requirements of network operators that have led to the use of these functions and practices in order to identify protocol requirements and determine whether those requirements are satisfied by existing specifications or if additional standards work is required. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document describes functions implemented in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) intermediaries known as Session Border Controllers (SBCs). The goal of this document is to describe the commonly provided functions of SBCs. A special focus is given to those practices that are viewed to be in conflict with SIP architectural principles. This document also explores the underlying requirements of network operators that have led to the use of these functions and practices in order to identify protocol requirements and determine whether those requirements are satisfied by existing specifications or if additional standards work is required. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5876: Updates to Asserted Identity in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Elwell
- April 2010
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) has a mechanism for conveying the identity of the originator of a request by means of the P-Asserted-Identity and P-Preferred-Identity header fields. These header fields are specified for use in requests using a number of SIP methods, in particular the INVITE method. However, RFC 3325 does not specify the insertion of the P-Asserted-Identity header field by a trusted User Agent Client (UAC), does not specify the use of P-Asserted-Identity and P-Preferred-Identity header fields with certain SIP methods such as UPDATE, REGISTER, MESSAGE, and PUBLISH, and does not specify how to handle an unexpected number of URIs or unexpected URI schemes in these header fields. This document extends RFC 3325 to cover these situations. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) has a mechanism for conveying the identity of the originator of a request by means of the P-Asserted-Identity and P-Preferred-Identity header fields. These header fields are specified for use in requests using a number of SIP methods, in particular the INVITE method. However, RFC 3325 does not specify the insertion of the P-Asserted-Identity header field by a trusted User Agent Client (UAC), does not specify the use of P-Asserted-Identity and P-Preferred-Identity header fields with certain SIP methods such as UPDATE, REGISTER, MESSAGE, and PUBLISH, and does not specify how to handle an unexpected number of URIs or unexpected URI schemes in these header fields. This document extends RFC 3325 to cover these situations. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5806: Diversion Indication in SIP
Historic- S. Levy
- M. Mohali
- March 2010
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This RFC, which contains the text of an Internet Draft that was submitted originally to the SIP Working Group, is being published now for the historical record and to provide a reference for later Informational RFCs. The original Abstract follows.
This document proposes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension provides the ability for the called SIP user agent to identify from whom the call was diverted and why the call was diverted. The extension defines a general header, Diversion, which conveys the diversion information from other SIP user agents and proxies to the called user agent.
This extension allows enhanced support for various features, including Unified Messaging, Third-Party Voicemail, and Automatic Call Distribution (ACD). SIP user agents and SIP proxies that receive diversion information may use this as supplemental information for feature invocation decisions. This document defines a Historic Document for the Internet community.
Abstract
This RFC, which contains the text of an Internet Draft that was submitted originally to the SIP Working Group, is being published now for the historical record and to provide a reference for later Informational RFCs. The original Abstract follows.
This document proposes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension provides the ability for the called SIP user agent to identify from whom the call was diverted and why the call was diverted. The extension defines a general header, Diversion, which conveys the diversion information from other SIP user agents and proxies to the called user agent.
This extension allows enhanced support for various features, including Unified Messaging, Third-Party Voicemail, and Automatic Call Distribution (ACD). SIP user agents and SIP proxies that receive diversion information may use this as supplemental information for feature invocation decisions. This document defines a Historic Document for the Internet community.
RFC 5727: BCP 67: Change Process for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Best Current Practice- J. Peterson
- C. Jennings
- R. Sparks
- March 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
This memo documents a process intended to organize the future development of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and related work in the Real-time Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) Area. As the environments in which SIP is deployed grow more numerous and diverse, modifying or extending SIP in certain ways may threaten the interoperability and security of the protocol; however, the IETF process must also cater to the realities of existing deployments and serve the needs of the implementers working with SIP. This document therefore defines the functions of two long-lived working groups in the RAI Area that are, respectively, responsible for the maintenance of the core SIP specifications and the development of new efforts to extend and apply work in this space. This document obsoletes RFC 3427. This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
Abstract
This memo documents a process intended to organize the future development of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and related work in the Real-time Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) Area. As the environments in which SIP is deployed grow more numerous and diverse, modifying or extending SIP in certain ways may threaten the interoperability and security of the protocol; however, the IETF process must also cater to the realities of existing deployments and serve the needs of the implementers working with SIP. This document therefore defines the functions of two long-lived working groups in the RAI Area that are, respectively, responsible for the maintenance of the core SIP specifications and the development of new efforts to extend and apply work in this space. This document obsoletes RFC 3427. This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
RFC 5379: Guidelines for Using the Privacy Mechanism for SIP
Informational- M. Munakata
- S. Schubert
- T. Ohba
- February 2010
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This is an informational document that provides guidelines for using the privacy mechanism for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that is specified in RFC 3323 and subsequently extended in RFCs 3325 and 4244. It is intended to clarify the handling of the target SIP headers/parameters and the Session Description Protocol (SDP) parameters for each of the privacy header values (priv-values). This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This is an informational document that provides guidelines for using the privacy mechanism for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that is specified in RFC 3323 and subsequently extended in RFCs 3325 and 4244. It is intended to clarify the handling of the target SIP headers/parameters and the Session Description Protocol (SDP) parameters for each of the privacy header values (priv-values). This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 5688: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Media Feature Tag for MIME Application Subtypes
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- January 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
The caller preferences specification for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows a caller to express preferences that the call be routed to a User Agent (UA) with particular capabilities. Similarly, a specification exists to allow a UA to indicate its capabilities in a registration. Amongst those capabilities are the type of media streams the agent supports, described as top-level MIME types. The 'application' MIME type is used to describe a broad range of stream types, and it provides insufficient granularity as a capability. This specification allows a UA to indicate which application subtypes the agent supports. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The caller preferences specification for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows a caller to express preferences that the call be routed to a User Agent (UA) with particular capabilities. Similarly, a specification exists to allow a UA to indicate its capabilities in a registration. Amongst those capabilities are the type of media streams the agent supports, described as top-level MIME types. The 'application' MIME type is used to describe a broad range of stream types, and it provides insufficient granularity as a capability. This specification allows a UA to indicate which application subtypes the agent supports. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5626: Managing Client-Initiated Connections in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- C. Jennings
- R. Mahy
- F. Audet
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows proxy servers to initiate TCP connections or to send asynchronous UDP datagrams to User Agents in order to deliver requests. However, in a large number of real deployments, many practical considerations, such as the existence of firewalls and Network Address Translators (NATs) or the use of TLS with server-provided certificates, prevent servers from connecting to User Agents in this way. This specification defines behaviors for User Agents, registrars, and proxy servers that allow requests to be delivered on existing connections established by the User Agent. It also defines keep-alive behaviors needed to keep NAT bindings open and specifies the usage of multiple connections from the User Agent to its registrar. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows proxy servers to initiate TCP connections or to send asynchronous UDP datagrams to User Agents in order to deliver requests. However, in a large number of real deployments, many practical considerations, such as the existence of firewalls and Network Address Translators (NATs) or the use of TLS with server-provided certificates, prevent servers from connecting to User Agents in this way. This specification defines behaviors for User Agents, registrars, and proxy servers that allow requests to be delivered on existing connections established by the User Agent. It also defines keep-alive behaviors needed to keep NAT bindings open and specifies the usage of multiple connections from the User Agent to its registrar. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5627: Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Several applications of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) require a user agent (UA) to construct and distribute a URI that can be used by anyone on the Internet to route a call to that specific UA instance. A URI that routes to a specific UA instance is called a Globally Routable UA URI (GRUU). This document describes an extension to SIP for obtaining a GRUU from a registrar and for communicating a GRUU to a peer within a dialog. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Several applications of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) require a user agent (UA) to construct and distribute a URI that can be used by anyone on the Internet to route a call to that specific UA instance. A URI that routes to a specific UA instance is called a Globally Routable UA URI (GRUU). This document describes an extension to SIP for obtaining a GRUU from a registrar and for communicating a GRUU to a peer within a dialog. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5628: Registration Event Package Extension for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Globally Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs)
Proposed Standard- P. Kyzivat
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
RFC 3680 defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for registration state. This package allows a watcher to learn about information stored by a SIP registrar, including its registered contact.
However, the registered contact is frequently unreachable and thus not useful for watchers. The Globally Routable User Agent URI (GRUU), defined in RFC 5627, is a URI that is capable of reaching a particular contact. However this URI is not included in the document format defined in RFC 3680. This specification defines an extension to the registration event package to include GRUUs assigned by the registrar. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
RFC 3680 defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for registration state. This package allows a watcher to learn about information stored by a SIP registrar, including its registered contact.
However, the registered contact is frequently unreachable and thus not useful for watchers. The Globally Routable User Agent URI (GRUU), defined in RFC 5627, is a URI that is capable of reaching a particular contact. However this URI is not included in the document format defined in RFC 3680. This specification defines an extension to the registration event package to include GRUUs assigned by the registrar. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5629: A Framework for Application Interaction in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a framework for the interaction between users and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) based applications. By interacting with applications, users can guide the way in which they operate. The focus of this framework is stimulus signaling, which allows a user agent (UA) to interact with an application without knowledge of the semantics of that application. Stimulus signaling can occur to a user interface running locally with the client, or to a remote user interface, through media streams. Stimulus signaling encompasses a wide range of mechanisms, ranging from clicking on hyperlinks, to pressing buttons, to traditional Dual-Tone Multi- Frequency (DTMF) input. In all cases, stimulus signaling is supported through the use of markup languages, which play a key role in this framework. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a framework for the interaction between users and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) based applications. By interacting with applications, users can guide the way in which they operate. The focus of this framework is stimulus signaling, which allows a user agent (UA) to interact with an application without knowledge of the semantics of that application. Stimulus signaling can occur to a user interface running locally with the client, or to a remote user interface, through media streams. Stimulus signaling encompasses a wide range of mechanisms, ranging from clicking on hyperlinks, to pressing buttons, to traditional Dual-Tone Multi- Frequency (DTMF) input. In all cases, stimulus signaling is supported through the use of markup languages, which play a key role in this framework. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5630: The Use of the SIPS URI Scheme in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- F. Audet
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document provides clarifications and guidelines concerning the use of the SIPS URI scheme in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It also makes normative changes to SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document provides clarifications and guidelines concerning the use of the SIPS URI scheme in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It also makes normative changes to SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5631: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Session Mobility
Informational- R. Shacham
- H. Schulzrinne
- S. Thakolsri
- W. Kellerer
- October 2009
- IETF publication
Abstract
Session mobility is the transfer of media of an ongoing communication session from one device to another. This document describes the basic approaches and shows the signaling and media flow examples for providing this service using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Service discovery is essential to locate targets for session transfer and is discussed using the Service Location Protocol (SLP) as an example. This document is an informational document. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Session mobility is the transfer of media of an ongoing communication session from one device to another. This document describes the basic approaches and shows the signaling and media flow examples for providing this service using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Service discovery is essential to locate targets for session transfer and is discussed using the Service Location Protocol (SLP) as an example. This document is an informational document. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5658: Addressing Record-Route Issues in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- T. Froment
- C. Lebel
- B. Bonnaerens
- October 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
A typical function of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Proxy is to insert a Record-Route header into initial, dialog-creating requests in order to make subsequent, in-dialog requests pass through it. This header contains a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or SIPS (secure SIP) URI indicating where and how the subsequent requests should be sent to reach the proxy. These SIP or SIPS URIs can contain IPv4 or IPv6 addresses and URI parameters that could influence the routing such as the transport parameter (for example, transport=tcp), or a compression indication like "comp=sigcomp". When a proxy has to change some of those parameters between its incoming and outgoing interfaces (multi-homed proxies, transport protocol switching, or IPv4 to IPv6 scenarios, etc.), the question arises on what should be put in Record-Route header(s). It is not possible to make one header have the characteristics of both interfaces at the same time. This document aims to clarify these scenarios and fix bugs already identified on this topic; it formally recommends the use of the double Record-Route technique as an alternative to the current RFC 3261 text, which describes only a Record-Route rewriting solution. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
A typical function of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Proxy is to insert a Record-Route header into initial, dialog-creating requests in order to make subsequent, in-dialog requests pass through it. This header contains a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or SIPS (secure SIP) URI indicating where and how the subsequent requests should be sent to reach the proxy. These SIP or SIPS URIs can contain IPv4 or IPv6 addresses and URI parameters that could influence the routing such as the transport parameter (for example, transport=tcp), or a compression indication like "comp=sigcomp". When a proxy has to change some of those parameters between its incoming and outgoing interfaces (multi-homed proxies, transport protocol switching, or IPv4 to IPv6 scenarios, etc.), the question arises on what should be put in Record-Route header(s). It is not possible to make one header have the characteristics of both interfaces at the same time. This document aims to clarify these scenarios and fix bugs already identified on this topic; it formally recommends the use of the double Record-Route technique as an alternative to the current RFC 3261 text, which describes only a Record-Route rewriting solution. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5638: Simple SIP Usage Scenario for Applications in the Endpoints
Informational- H. Sinnreich
- A. Johnston
- E. Shim
- K. Singh
- September 2009
- IETF publication
Abstract
For Internet-centric usage, the number of SIP-required standards for presence and IM and audio/video communications can be drastically smaller than what has been published by using only the rendezvous and session-initiation capabilities of SIP. The simplification is achieved by avoiding the emulation of telephony and its model of the intelligent network. 'Simple SIP' relies on powerful computing endpoints. Simple SIP desktop applications can be combined with rich Internet applications (RIAs). Significant telephony features may also be implemented in the endpoints.
This approach for SIP reduces the number of SIP standards with which to comply -- from roughly 100 currently, and still growing, to about 11.
References for NAT traversal and for security are also provided. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
For Internet-centric usage, the number of SIP-required standards for presence and IM and audio/video communications can be drastically smaller than what has been published by using only the rendezvous and session-initiation capabilities of SIP. The simplification is achieved by avoiding the emulation of telephony and its model of the intelligent network. 'Simple SIP' relies on powerful computing endpoints. Simple SIP desktop applications can be combined with rich Internet applications (RIAs). Significant telephony features may also be implemented in the endpoints.
This approach for SIP reduces the number of SIP standards with which to comply -- from roughly 100 currently, and still growing, to about 11.
References for NAT traversal and for security are also provided. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5621: Message Body Handling in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- September 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies how message bodies are handled in SIP. Additionally, this document specifies SIP user agent support for MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) in message bodies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies how message bodies are handled in SIP. Additionally, this document specifies SIP user agent support for MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) in message bodies. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5616: Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments
Informational- N. Cook
- August 2009
- IETF publication
- Applications Area
Abstract
This document describes a method for streaming multimedia attachments received by a resource- and/or network-constrained device from an IMAP server. It allows such clients, which often have limits in storage space and bandwidth, to play video and audio email content.
The document describes a profile for making use of the URLAUTH- authorized IMAP URLs (RFC 5092), the Network Announcement SIP Media Service (RFC 4240), and the Media Server Control Markup Language (RFC 5022). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes a method for streaming multimedia attachments received by a resource- and/or network-constrained device from an IMAP server. It allows such clients, which often have limits in storage space and bandwidth, to play video and audio email content.
The document describes a profile for making use of the URLAUTH- authorized IMAP URLs (RFC 5092), the Network Announcement SIP Media Service (RFC 4240), and the Media Server Control Markup Language (RFC 5022). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5606: Implications of 'retransmission-allowed' for SIP Location Conveyance
Informational- J. Peterson
- T. Hardie
- J. Morris
- August 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document explores an ambiguity in the interpretation of the <retransmission-allowed> element of the Presence Information Data Format for Location Objects (PIDF-LO) in cases where PIDF-LO is conveyed by the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It provides recommendations for how the SIP location conveyance mechanism should adapt to this ambiguity.
Documents standardizing the SIP location conveyance mechanisms will be Standards-Track documents processed according to the usual SIP process. This document is intended primarily to provide the SIP working group with a statement of the consensus of the GEOPRIV working group on this topic. It secondarily provides tutorial information on the problem space for the general reader. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document explores an ambiguity in the interpretation of the <retransmission-allowed> element of the Presence Information Data Format for Location Objects (PIDF-LO) in cases where PIDF-LO is conveyed by the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It provides recommendations for how the SIP location conveyance mechanism should adapt to this ambiguity.
Documents standardizing the SIP location conveyance mechanisms will be Standards-Track documents processed according to the usual SIP process. This document is intended primarily to provide the SIP working group with a statement of the consensus of the GEOPRIV working group on this topic. It secondarily provides tutorial information on the problem space for the general reader. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5589: BCP 149: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Call Control - Transfer
Best Current Practice- R. Sparks
- A. Johnston
- D. Petrie
- June 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes providing Call Transfer capabilities in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). SIP extensions such as REFER and Replaces are used to provide a number of transfer services including blind transfer, consultative transfer, and attended transfer. This work is part of the SIP multiparty call control framework. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document describes providing Call Transfer capabilities in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). SIP extensions such as REFER and Replaces are used to provide a number of transfer services including blind transfer, consultative transfer, and attended transfer. This work is part of the SIP multiparty call control framework. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 5552: SIP Interface to VoiceXML Media Services
Proposed Standard- D. Burke
- M. Scott
- May 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a SIP interface to VoiceXML media services. Commonly, Application Servers controlling Media Servers use this protocol for pure VoiceXML processing capabilities. This protocol is an adjunct to the full MEDIACTRL protocol and packages mechanism. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a SIP interface to VoiceXML media services. Commonly, Application Servers controlling Media Servers use this protocol for pure VoiceXML processing capabilities. This protocol is an adjunct to the full MEDIACTRL protocol and packages mechanism. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5502: The SIP P-Served-User Private-Header (P-Header) for the 3GPP IP Multimedia (IM) Core Network (CN) Subsystem
Informational- J. van Elburg
- April 2009
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Served-User P-header. This header field addresses an issue that was found in the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) between an S-CSCF (Serving Call Session Control Function) and an AS (Application Server) on the ISC (IMS Service Control) interface. This header field conveys the identity of the served user and the session case that applies to this particular communication session and application invocation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Served-User P-header. This header field addresses an issue that was found in the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) between an S-CSCF (Serving Call Session Control Function) and an AS (Application Server) on the ISC (IMS Service Control) interface. This header field conveys the identity of the served user and the session case that applies to this particular communication session and application invocation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5479: Requirements and Analysis of Media Security Management Protocols
Informational- D. Wing
- S. Fries
- H. Tschofenig
- F. Audet
- April 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes requirements for a protocol to negotiate a security context for SIP-signaled Secure RTP (SRTP) media. In addition to the natural security requirements, this negotiation protocol must interoperate well with SIP in certain ways. A number of proposals have been published and a summary of these proposals is in the appendix of this document. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes requirements for a protocol to negotiate a security context for SIP-signaled Secure RTP (SRTP) media. In addition to the natural security requirements, this negotiation protocol must interoperate well with SIP in certain ways. A number of proposals have been published and a summary of these proposals is in the appendix of this document. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5509: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registration of Instant Messaging and Presence DNS SRV RRs for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- S. Loreto
- April 2009
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document registers with IANA two new DNS SRV protocol labels for resolving Instant Messaging and Presence services with SIP. [STANDARDS TRACK]
Abstract
This document registers with IANA two new DNS SRV protocol labels for resolving Instant Messaging and Presence services with SIP. [STANDARDS TRACK]
RFC 5503: Private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Proxy-to-Proxy Extensions for Supporting the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture
Informational- F. Andreasen
- B. McKibben
- B. Marshall
- March 2009
- IETF publication
Abstract
In order to deploy a residential telephone service at a very large scale across different domains, it is necessary for trusted elements owned by different service providers to exchange trusted information that conveys customer-specific information and expectations about the parties involved in the call. This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol, RFC 3261, for supporting the exchange of customer information and billing information between trusted entities in the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture. These extensions provide mechanisms for access network coordination to prevent theft of service, customer originated trace of harassing calls, support for operator services and emergency services, and support for various other regulatory issues. The use of the extensions is only applicable within closed administrative domains, or among federations of administrative domains with previously agreed-upon policies where coordination of charging and other functions is required. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
In order to deploy a residential telephone service at a very large scale across different domains, it is necessary for trusted elements owned by different service providers to exchange trusted information that conveys customer-specific information and expectations about the parties involved in the call. This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol, RFC 3261, for supporting the exchange of customer information and billing information between trusted entities in the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture. These extensions provide mechanisms for access network coordination to prevent theft of service, customer originated trace of harassing calls, support for operator services and emergency services, and support for various other regulatory issues. The use of the extensions is only applicable within closed administrative domains, or among federations of administrative domains with previously agreed-upon policies where coordination of charging and other functions is required. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5478: IANA Registration of New Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority Namespaces
Proposed Standard- J. Polk
- March 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document creates additional Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority namespaces to meet the requirements of the US Defense Information Systems Agency, and places these namespaces in the IANA registry. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document creates additional Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Resource-Priority namespaces to meet the requirements of the US Defense Information Systems Agency, and places these namespaces in the IANA registry. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5411: A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- February 2009
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is the subject of numerous specifications that have been produced by the IETF. It can be difficult to locate the right document, or even to determine the set of Request for Comments (RFC) about SIP. This specification serves as a guide to the SIP RFC series. It lists a current snapshot of the specifications under the SIP umbrella, briefly summarizes each, and groups them into categories. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is the subject of numerous specifications that have been produced by the IETF. It can be difficult to locate the right document, or even to determine the set of Request for Comments (RFC) about SIP. This specification serves as a guide to the SIP RFC series. It lists a current snapshot of the specifications under the SIP umbrella, briefly summarizes each, and groups them into categories. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5393: Addressing an Amplification Vulnerability in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Forking Proxies
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- S. Lawrence
- A. Hawrylyshen
- B. Campen
- December 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), to address a security vulnerability identified in SIP proxy behavior. This vulnerability enables an attack against SIP networks where a small number of legitimate, even authorized, SIP requests can stimulate massive amounts of proxy-to-proxy traffic.
This document strengthens loop-detection requirements on SIP proxies when they fork requests (that is, forward a request to more than one destination). It also corrects and clarifies the description of the loop-detection algorithm such proxies are required to implement. Additionally, this document defines a Max-Breadth mechanism for limiting the number of concurrent branches pursued for any given request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document normatively updates RFC 3261, the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), to address a security vulnerability identified in SIP proxy behavior. This vulnerability enables an attack against SIP networks where a small number of legitimate, even authorized, SIP requests can stimulate massive amounts of proxy-to-proxy traffic.
This document strengthens loop-detection requirements on SIP proxies when they fork requests (that is, forward a request to more than one destination). It also corrects and clarifies the description of the loop-detection algorithm such proxies are required to implement. Additionally, this document defines a Max-Breadth mechanism for limiting the number of concurrent branches pursued for any given request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5407: BCP 147: Example Call Flows of Race Conditions in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Best Current Practice- M. Hasebe
- J. Koshiko
- Y. Suzuki
- T. Yoshikawa
- P. Kyzivat
- December 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document gives example call flows of race conditions in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Race conditions are inherently confusing and difficult to thwart; this document shows the best practices to handle them. The elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents and SIP Proxy Servers. Call flow diagrams and message details are given. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document gives example call flows of race conditions in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Race conditions are inherently confusing and difficult to thwart; this document shows the best practices to handle them. The elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents and SIP Proxy Servers. Call flow diagrams and message details are given. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 5390: Requirements for Management of Overload in the Session Initiation Protocol
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- December 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when proxies and user agents have insufficient resources to complete the processing of a request. SIP provides limited support for overload handling through its 503 response code, which tells an upstream element that it is overloaded. However, numerous problems have been identified with this mechanism. This document summarizes the problems with the existing 503 mechanism, and provides some requirements for a solution. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Overload occurs in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) networks when proxies and user agents have insufficient resources to complete the processing of a request. SIP provides limited support for overload handling through its 503 response code, which tells an upstream element that it is overloaded. However, numerous problems have been identified with this mechanism. This document summarizes the problems with the existing 503 mechanism, and provides some requirements for a solution. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5318: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Refused-URI-List Private-Header (P-Header)
Informational- J. Hautakorpi
- G. Camarillo
- December 2008
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Refused-URI-List Private-Header (P-Header). This P-Header is used in the Open Mobile Alliance's (OMA) Push to talk over Cellular (PoC) system. It enables URI-list servers to refuse the handling of incoming URI lists that have embedded URI lists. This P-Header also makes it possible for the URI-list server to inform the client about the embedded URI list that caused the rejection and the individual URIs that form such a URI list. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document specifies the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Refused-URI-List Private-Header (P-Header). This P-Header is used in the Open Mobile Alliance's (OMA) Push to talk over Cellular (PoC) system. It enables URI-list servers to refuse the handling of incoming URI lists that have embedded URI lists. This P-Header also makes it possible for the URI-list server to inform the client about the embedded URI list that caused the rejection and the individual URIs that form such a URI list. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5373: Requesting Answering Modes for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- D. Willis
- A. Allen
- November 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document extends SIP with two header fields and associated option tags that can be used in INVITE requests to convey the requester's preference for user-interface handling related to answering of that request. The first header, "Answer-Mode", expresses a preference as to whether the target node's user interface waits for user input before accepting the request or, instead, accepts the request without waiting on user input. The second header, "Priv-Answer-Mode", is similar to the first, except that it requests administrative-level access and has consequent additional authentication and authorization requirements. These behaviors have applicability to applications such as push-to-talk and to diagnostics like loop-back. Usage of each header field in a response to indicate how the request was handled is also defined. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document extends SIP with two header fields and associated option tags that can be used in INVITE requests to convey the requester's preference for user-interface handling related to answering of that request. The first header, "Answer-Mode", expresses a preference as to whether the target node's user interface waits for user input before accepting the request or, instead, accepts the request without waiting on user input. The second header, "Priv-Answer-Mode", is similar to the first, except that it requests administrative-level access and has consequent additional authentication and authorization requirements. These behaviors have applicability to applications such as push-to-talk and to diagnostics like loop-back. Usage of each header field in a response to indicate how the request was handled is also defined. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5360: A Framework for Consent-Based Communications in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- G. Camarillo
- D. Willis
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
SIP supports communications for several services, including real-time audio, video, text, instant messaging, and presence. In its current form, it allows session invitations, instant messages, and other requests to be delivered from one party to another without requiring explicit consent of the recipient. Without such consent, it is possible for SIP to be used for malicious purposes, including amplification and DoS (Denial of Service) attacks. This document identifies a framework for consent-based communications in SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
SIP supports communications for several services, including real-time audio, video, text, instant messaging, and presence. In its current form, it allows session invitations, instant messages, and other requests to be delivered from one party to another without requiring explicit consent of the recipient. Without such consent, it is possible for SIP to be used for malicious purposes, including amplification and DoS (Denial of Service) attacks. This document identifies a framework for consent-based communications in SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5361: A Document Format for Requesting Consent
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines an Extensible Markup Language (XML) format for a permission document used to request consent. A permission document written in this format is used by a relay to request a specific recipient permission to perform a particular routing translation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines an Extensible Markup Language (XML) format for a permission document used to request consent. A permission document written in this format is used by a relay to request a specific recipient permission to perform a particular routing translation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5362: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Pending Additions Event Package
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines the SIP Pending Additions event package. This event package is used by SIP relays to inform user agents about the consent-related status of the entries to be added to a resource list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines the SIP Pending Additions event package. This event package is used by SIP relays to inform user agents about the consent-related status of the entries to be added to a resource list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5363: Framework and Security Considerations for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) URI-List Services
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A.B. Roach
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes the need for SIP URI-list services and provides requirements for their invocation. Additionally, it defines a framework for SIP URI-list services, which includes security considerations applicable to these services. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes the need for SIP URI-list services and provides requirements for their invocation. Additionally, it defines a framework for SIP URI-list services, which includes security considerations applicable to these services. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5364: Extensible Markup Language (XML) Format Extension for Representing Copy Control Attributes in Resource Lists
Proposed Standard- M. Garcia-Martin
- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
In certain types of multimedia communications, a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request is distributed to a group of SIP User Agents (UAs). The sender sends a single SIP request to a server which further distributes the request to the group. This SIP request contains a list of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs), which identify the recipients of the SIP request. This URI list is expressed as a resource list XML document. This specification defines an XML extension to the XML resource list format that allows the sender of the request to qualify a recipient with a copy control level similar to the copy control level of existing email systems. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
In certain types of multimedia communications, a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request is distributed to a group of SIP User Agents (UAs). The sender sends a single SIP request to a server which further distributes the request to the group. This SIP request contains a list of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs), which identify the recipients of the SIP request. This URI list is expressed as a resource list XML document. This specification defines an XML extension to the XML resource list format that allows the sender of the request to qualify a recipient with a copy control level similar to the copy control level of existing email systems. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5365: Multiple-Recipient MESSAGE Requests in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- M. Garcia-Martin
- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism that allows a SIP User Agent Client (UAC) to send a SIP MESSAGE request to a set of destinations, by using a SIP URI-list (Uniform Resource Identifier list) service. The UAC sends a SIP MESSAGE request that includes the payload along with the URI list to the MESSAGE URI-list service, which sends a MESSAGE request including the payload to each of the URIs included in the list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism that allows a SIP User Agent Client (UAC) to send a SIP MESSAGE request to a set of destinations, by using a SIP URI-list (Uniform Resource Identifier list) service. The UAC sends a SIP MESSAGE request that includes the payload along with the URI list to the MESSAGE URI-list service, which sends a MESSAGE request including the payload to each of the URIs included in the list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5366: Conference Establishment Using Request-Contained Lists in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A. Johnston
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to create a conference using SIP URI-list services. In particular, it describes a mechanism that allows a User Agent Client to provide a conference server with the initial list of participants using an INVITE-contained URI list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes how to create a conference using SIP URI-list services. In particular, it describes a mechanism that allows a User Agent Client to provide a conference server with the initial list of participants using an INVITE-contained URI list. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5367: Subscriptions to Request-Contained Resource Lists in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A.B. Roach
- O. Levin
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies a way to create subscription to a list of resources in SIP. This is achieved by including the list of resources in the body of a SUBSCRIBE request. Instead of having a subscriber send a SUBSCRIBE request for each resource individually, the subscriber defines the resource list, subscribes to it, and gets notifications about changes in the resources' states using a single SUBSCRIBE dialog. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies a way to create subscription to a list of resources in SIP. This is achieved by including the list of resources in the body of a SUBSCRIBE request. Instead of having a subscriber send a SUBSCRIBE request for each resource individually, the subscriber defines the resource list, subscribes to it, and gets notifications about changes in the resources' states using a single SUBSCRIBE dialog. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5368: Referring to Multiple Resources in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A. Niemi
- M. Isomaki
- M. Garcia-Martin
- H. Khartabil
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines extensions to the SIP REFER method so that it can be used to refer to multiple resources in a single request. These extensions include the use of pointers to Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) lists in the Refer-To header field and the "multiple-refer" SIP option-tag. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines extensions to the SIP REFER method so that it can be used to refer to multiple resources in a single request. These extensions include the use of pointers to Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) lists in the Refer-To header field and the "multiple-refer" SIP option-tag. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5369: Framework for Transcoding with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a framework for transcoding with SIP. This framework includes how to discover the need for transcoding services in a session and how to invoke those transcoding services. Two models for transcoding services invocation are discussed: the conference bridge model and the third-party call control model. Both models meet the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing, and speech-impaired individuals. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document defines a framework for transcoding with SIP. This framework includes how to discover the need for transcoding services in a session and how to invoke those transcoding services. Two models for transcoding services invocation are discussed: the conference bridge model and the third-party call control model. Both models meet the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing, and speech-impaired individuals. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5370: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Conference Bridge Transcoding Model
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to invoke transcoding services using the conference bridge model. This way of invocation meets the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing, and speech-impaired individuals. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes how to invoke transcoding services using the conference bridge model. This way of invocation meets the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing, and speech-impaired individuals. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5359: BCP 144: Session Initiation Protocol Service Examples
Best Current Practice- A. Johnston
- R. Sparks
- C. Cunningham
- S. Donovan
- K. Summers
- October 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) services. This covers most features offered in so-called IP Centrex offerings from local exchange carriers and PBX (Private Branch Exchange) features. Most of the services shown in this document are implemented in the SIP user agents, although some require the assistance of a SIP proxy. Some require some extensions to SIP including the REFER, SUBSCRIBE, and NOTIFY methods and the Replaces and Join header fields. These features are not intended to be an exhaustive set, but rather show implementations of common features likely to be implemented on SIP IP telephones in a business environment. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) services. This covers most features offered in so-called IP Centrex offerings from local exchange carriers and PBX (Private Branch Exchange) features. Most of the services shown in this document are implemented in the SIP user agents, although some require the assistance of a SIP proxy. Some require some extensions to SIP including the REFER, SUBSCRIBE, and NOTIFY methods and the Replaces and Join header fields. These features are not intended to be an exhaustive set, but rather show implementations of common features likely to be implemented on SIP IP telephones in a business environment. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 5278: IANA Registration of Enumservices for Voice and Video Messaging
Proposed Standard- J. Livingood
- D. Troshynski
- July 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document registers the Enumservice named "vmsg", which is used to facilitate the real-time routing of voice, video, and unified communications to a messaging system. This vmsg Enumservice registers three Enumservice types: "voicemsg", "videomsg", and "unifmsg". Each type also registers the subtypes "sip", "sips", "http", and "https", as well as the subtype "tel" for the "voicemsg" type. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document registers the Enumservice named "vmsg", which is used to facilitate the real-time routing of voice, video, and unified communications to a messaging system. This vmsg Enumservice registers three Enumservice types: "voicemsg", "videomsg", and "unifmsg". Each type also registers the subtypes "sip", "sips", "http", and "https", as well as the subtype "tel" for the "voicemsg" type. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5194: Framework for Real-Time Text over IP Using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- A. van Wijk
- G. Gybels
- June 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document lists the essential requirements for real-time Text-over-IP (ToIP) and defines a framework for implementation of all required functions based on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP). This includes interworking between Text-over-IP and existing text telephony on the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and other networks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document lists the essential requirements for real-time Text-over-IP (ToIP) and defines a framework for implementation of all required functions based on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP). This includes interworking between Text-over-IP and existing text telephony on the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and other networks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5090: RADIUS Extension for Digest Authentication
Proposed Standard- B. Sterman
- D. Sadolevsky
- D. Schwartz
- D. Williams
- W. Beck
- February 2008
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) protocol to enable support of Digest Authentication, for use with HTTP-style protocols like the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and HTTP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) protocol to enable support of Digest Authentication, for use with HTTP-style protocols like the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and HTTP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5118: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Torture Test Messages for Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
Informational- V. Gurbani
- C. Boulton
- R. Sparks
- February 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document provides examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) test messages designed to exercise and "torture" the code of an IPv6-enabled SIP implementation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document provides examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) test messages designed to exercise and "torture" the code of an IPv6-enabled SIP implementation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5039: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Spam
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- C. Jennings
- January 2008
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Spam, defined as the transmission of bulk unsolicited messages, has plagued Internet email. Unfortunately, spam is not limited to email. It can affect any system that enables user-to-user communications. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) defines a system for user-to- user multimedia communications. Therefore, it is susceptible to spam, just as email is. In this document, we analyze the problem of spam in SIP. We first identify the ways in which the problem is the same and the ways in which it is different from email. We then examine the various possible solutions that have been discussed for email and consider their applicability to SIP. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Spam, defined as the transmission of bulk unsolicited messages, has plagued Internet email. Unfortunately, spam is not limited to email. It can affect any system that enables user-to-user communications. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) defines a system for user-to- user multimedia communications. Therefore, it is susceptible to spam, just as email is. In this document, we analyze the problem of spam in SIP. We first identify the ways in which the problem is the same and the ways in which it is different from email. We then examine the various possible solutions that have been discussed for email and consider their applicability to SIP. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5079: Rejecting Anonymous Requests in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- December 2007
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows for users to make anonymous calls. However, users receiving such calls have the right to reject them because they are anonymous. SIP has no way to indicate to the caller that the reason for call rejection was that the call was anonymous. Such an indication is useful to allow the call to be retried without anonymity. This specification defines a new SIP response code for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) allows for users to make anonymous calls. However, users receiving such calls have the right to reject them because they are anonymous. SIP has no way to indicate to the caller that the reason for call rejection was that the call was anonymous. Such an indication is useful to allow the call to be retried without anonymity. This specification defines a new SIP response code for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5057: Multiple Dialog Usages in the Session Initiation Protocol
Informational- R. Sparks
- November 2007
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Several methods in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) can create an association between endpoints known as a dialog. Some of these methods can also create a different, but related, association within an existing dialog. These multiple associations, or dialog usages, require carefully coordinated processing as they have independent life-cycles, but share common dialog state. Processing multiple dialog usages correctly is not completely understood. What is understood is difficult to implement.
This memo argues that multiple dialog usages should be avoided. It discusses alternatives to their use and clarifies essential behavior for elements that cannot currently avoid them.
This is an informative document and makes no normative statements of any kind. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Several methods in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) can create an association between endpoints known as a dialog. Some of these methods can also create a different, but related, association within an existing dialog. These multiple associations, or dialog usages, require carefully coordinated processing as they have independent life-cycles, but share common dialog state. Processing multiple dialog usages correctly is not completely understood. What is understood is difficult to implement.
This memo argues that multiple dialog usages should be avoided. It discusses alternatives to their use and clarifies essential behavior for elements that cannot currently avoid them.
This is an informative document and makes no normative statements of any kind. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5009: Private Header (P-Header) Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Authorization of Early Media
Informational- R. Ejzak
- September 2007
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes a private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header field (P-header) to be used by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) Telecommunications and Internet-converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networks (TISPAN) for the purpose of authorizing early media flows in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS). This header field is useful in any SIP network that is interconnected with other SIP networks and needs to control the flow of media in the early dialog state. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes a private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header field (P-header) to be used by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) Telecommunications and Internet-converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networks (TISPAN) for the purpose of authorizing early media flows in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS). This header field is useful in any SIP network that is interconnected with other SIP networks and needs to control the flow of media in the early dialog state. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5022: Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) and Protocol
Informational- J. Van Dyke
- E. Burger
- A. Spitzer
- September 2007
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) is a markup language used in conjunction with SIP to provide advanced conferencing and interactive voice response (IVR) functions. MSCML presents an application-level control model, as opposed to device-level control models. One use of this protocol is for communications between a conference focus and mixer in the IETF SIP Conferencing Framework. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) is a markup language used in conjunction with SIP to provide advanced conferencing and interactive voice response (IVR) functions. MSCML presents an application-level control model, as opposed to device-level control models. One use of this protocol is for communications between a conference focus and mixer in the IETF SIP Conferencing Framework. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4964: The P-Answer-State Header Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol for the Open Mobile Alliance Push to Talk over Cellular
Informational- A. Allen
- J. Holm
- T. Hallin
- September 2007
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes a private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header (P-header) used by the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) for Push to talk over Cellular (PoC) along with its applicability, which is limited to the OMA PoC application. The P-Answer-State header is used for indicating the answering mode of the handset, which is particular to the PoC application. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes a private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header (P-header) used by the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) for Push to talk over Cellular (PoC) along with its applicability, which is limited to the OMA PoC application. The P-Answer-State header is used for indicating the answering mode of the handset, which is particular to the PoC application. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5002: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Profile-Key Private Header (P-Header)
Informational- G. Camarillo
- G. Blanco
- August 2007
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Profile-Key P-header. This header field is used in the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) to provide SIP registrars and SIP proxy servers with the key of the profile corresponding to the destination SIP URI of a particular SIP request. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document specifies the SIP P-Profile-Key P-header. This header field is used in the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) to provide SIP registrars and SIP proxy servers with the key of the profile corresponding to the destination SIP URI of a particular SIP request. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4967: Dial String Parameter for the Session Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource Identifier
Proposed Standard- B. Rosen
- July 2007
- IETF publication
Abstract
RFC 3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a standardized way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter "user=phone", and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", so that one may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as a 'sip:' or 'sips:' URI. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
RFC 3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a standardized way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter "user=phone", and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", so that one may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as a 'sip:' or 'sips:' URI. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4916: Connected Identity in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Elwell
- June 2007
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document provides a means for a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) that receives a dialog-forming request to supply its identity to the peer UA by means of a request in the reverse direction, and for that identity to be signed by an Authentication Service. Because of retargeting of a dialog-forming request (changing the value of the Request-URI), the UA that receives it (the User Agent Server, UAS) can have a different identity from that in the To header field. The same mechanism can be used to indicate a change of identity during a dialog, e.g., because of some action in the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) behind a gateway. This document normatively updates RFC 3261 (SIP). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document provides a means for a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) that receives a dialog-forming request to supply its identity to the peer UA by means of a request in the reverse direction, and for that identity to be signed by an Authentication Service. Because of retargeting of a dialog-forming request (changing the value of the Request-URI), the UA that receives it (the User Agent Server, UAS) can have a different identity from that in the To header field. The same mechanism can be used to indicate a change of identity during a dialog, e.g., because of some action in the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) behind a gateway. This document normatively updates RFC 3261 (SIP). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4904: Representing Trunk Groups in tel/sip Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- C. Jennings
- June 2007
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a standardized mechanism to convey trunk group parameters in sip and tel Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). An extension to the tel URI is defined for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a standardized mechanism to convey trunk group parameters in sip and tel Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). An extension to the tel URI is defined for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4780: Management Information Base for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- K. Lingle
- J-F. Mule
- J. Maeng
- D. Walker
- April 2007
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes a set of managed objects that are used to manage Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities, which include User Agents, and Proxy, Redirect and Registrar servers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes a set of managed objects that are used to manage Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) entities, which include User Agents, and Proxy, Redirect and Registrar servers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4787: BCP 127: Network Address Translation (NAT) Behavioral Requirements for Unicast UDP
Best Current Practice- F. Audet
- C. Jennings
- January 2007
- IETF publication
- Transport Area
Abstract
This document defines basic terminology for describing different types of Network Address Translation (NAT) behavior when handling Unicast UDP and also defines a set of requirements that would allow many applications, such as multimedia communications or online gaming, to work consistently. Developing NATs that meet this set of requirements will greatly increase the likelihood that these applications will function properly. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document defines basic terminology for describing different types of Network Address Translation (NAT) behavior when handling Unicast UDP and also defines a set of requirements that would allow many applications, such as multimedia communications or online gaming, to work consistently. Developing NATs that meet this set of requirements will greatly increase the likelihood that these applications will function properly. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 4769: IANA Registration for an Enumservice Containing Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) Signaling Information
Proposed Standard- J. Livingood
- R. Shockey
- November 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document registers the Enumservice type "pstn" and subtype "tel" using the URI scheme 'tel', as well as the subtype "sip" using the URI scheme 'sip' as per the IANA registration process defined in the ENUM specification, RFC 3761. This Enumservice is used to facilitate the routing of telephone calls in those countries where number portability exists. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document registers the Enumservice type "pstn" and subtype "tel" using the URI scheme 'tel', as well as the subtype "sip" using the URI scheme 'sip' as per the IANA registration process defined in the ENUM specification, RFC 3761. This Enumservice is used to facilitate the routing of telephone calls in those countries where number portability exists. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4740: Diameter Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Application
Proposed Standard- M. Garcia-Martin
- M. Belinchon
- M. Pallares-Lopez
- C. Canales-Valenzuela
- K. Tammi
- November 2006
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document specifies the Diameter Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) application. This is a Diameter application that allows a Diameter client to request authentication and authorization information. This application is designed to be used in conjunction with SIP and provides a Diameter client co-located with a SIP server, with the ability to request the authentication of users and authorization of SIP resources usage from a Diameter server. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies the Diameter Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) application. This is a Diameter application that allows a Diameter client to request authentication and authorization information. This application is designed to be used in conjunction with SIP and provides a Diameter client co-located with a SIP server, with the ability to request the authentication of users and authorization of SIP resources usage from a Diameter server. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4722: Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) and Protocol
Informational- J. Van Dyke
- E. Burger
- A. Spitzer
- November 2006
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) is a markup language used in conjunction with SIP to provide advanced conferencing and interactive voice response (IVR) functions. MSCML presents an application-level control model, as opposed to device-level control models. One use of this protocol is for communications between a conference focus and mixer in the IETF SIP Conferencing Framework. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
- Obsoleted by RFC 5022
Abstract
Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) is a markup language used in conjunction with SIP to provide advanced conferencing and interactive voice response (IVR) functions. MSCML presents an application-level control model, as opposed to device-level control models. One use of this protocol is for communications between a conference focus and mixer in the IETF SIP Conferencing Framework. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4730: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Key Press Stimulus (KPML)
Proposed Standard- E. Burger
- M. Dolly
- November 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a SIP Event Package "kpml" that enables monitoring of Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF) signals and uses Extensible Markup Language (XML) documents referred to as Key Press Markup Language (KPML). The kpml Event Package may be used to support applications consistent with the principles defined in the document titled "A Framework for Application Interaction in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)". The event package uses SUBSCRIBE messages and allows for XML documents that define and describe filter specifications for capturing key presses (DTMF Tones) entered at a presentation-free User Interface SIP User Agent (UA). The event package uses NOTIFY messages and allows for XML documents to report the captured key presses (DTMF tones), consistent with the filter specifications, to an Application Server. The scope of this package is for collecting supplemental key presses or mid-call key presses (triggers). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a SIP Event Package "kpml" that enables monitoring of Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF) signals and uses Extensible Markup Language (XML) documents referred to as Key Press Markup Language (KPML). The kpml Event Package may be used to support applications consistent with the principles defined in the document titled "A Framework for Application Interaction in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)". The event package uses SUBSCRIBE messages and allows for XML documents that define and describe filter specifications for capturing key presses (DTMF Tones) entered at a presentation-free User Interface SIP User Agent (UA). The event package uses NOTIFY messages and allows for XML documents to report the captured key presses (DTMF tones), consistent with the filter specifications, to an Application Server. The scope of this package is for collecting supplemental key presses or mid-call key presses (triggers). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4474: Enhancements for Authenticated Identity Management in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- C. Jennings
- August 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The existing security mechanisms in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) are inadequate for cryptographically assuring the identity of the end users that originate SIP requests, especially in an interdomain context. This document defines a mechanism for securely identifying originators of SIP messages. It does so by defining two new SIP header fields, Identity, for conveying a signature used for validating the identity, and Identity-Info, for conveying a reference to the certificate of the signer. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 8224
Abstract
The existing security mechanisms in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) are inadequate for cryptographically assuring the identity of the end users that originate SIP requests, especially in an interdomain context. This document defines a mechanism for securely identifying originators of SIP messages. It does so by defining two new SIP header fields, Identity, for conveying a signature used for validating the identity, and Identity-Info, for conveying a reference to the certificate of the signer. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4484: Trait-Based Authorization Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Peterson
- J. Polk
- D. Sicker
- H. Tschofenig
- August 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document lays out a set of requirements related to trait-based authorization for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). While some authentication mechanisms are described in the base SIP specification, trait-based authorization provides information used to make policy decisions based on the attributes of a participant in a session. This approach provides a richer framework for authorization, as well as allows greater privacy for users of an identity system. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document lays out a set of requirements related to trait-based authorization for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). While some authentication mechanisms are described in the base SIP specification, trait-based authorization provides information used to make policy decisions based on the attributes of a participant in a session. This approach provides a richer framework for authorization, as well as allows greater privacy for users of an identity system. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4575: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Conference State
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- O. Levin
- August 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a conference event package for tightly coupled conferences using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework, along with a data format used in notifications for this package. The conference package allows users to subscribe to a conference Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). Notifications are sent about changes in the membership of this conference and optionally about changes in the state of additional conference components. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a conference event package for tightly coupled conferences using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework, along with a data format used in notifications for this package. The conference package allows users to subscribe to a conference Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). Notifications are sent about changes in the membership of this conference and optionally about changes in the state of additional conference components. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4579: BCP 119: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Call Control - Conferencing for User Agents
Best Current Practice- A. Johnston
- O. Levin
- August 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines conferencing call control features for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document builds on the Conferencing Requirements and Framework documents to define how a tightly coupled SIP conference works. The approach is explored from the perspective of different user agent (UA) types: conference-unaware, conference-aware, and focus UAs. The use of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) in conferencing, OPTIONS for capabilities discovery, and call control using REFER are covered in detail with example call flow diagrams. The usage of the isfocus feature tag is defined. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This specification defines conferencing call control features for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document builds on the Conferencing Requirements and Framework documents to define how a tightly coupled SIP conference works. The approach is explored from the perspective of different user agent (UA) types: conference-unaware, conference-aware, and focus UAs. The use of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) in conferencing, OPTIONS for capabilities discovery, and call control using REFER are covered in detail with example call flow diagrams. The usage of the isfocus feature tag is defined. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 4596: Guidelines for Usage of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Caller Preferences Extension
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- P. Kyzivat
- July 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document contains guidelines for usage of the Caller Preferences Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It demonstrates the benefits of caller preferences with specific example applications, provides use cases to show proper operation, provides guidance on the applicability of the registered feature tags, and describes a straightforward implementation of the preference and capability matching algorithm specified in Section 7.2 of RFC 3841. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document contains guidelines for usage of the Caller Preferences Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). It demonstrates the benefits of caller preferences with specific example applications, provides use cases to show proper operation, provides guidance on the applicability of the registered feature tags, and describes a straightforward implementation of the preference and capability matching algorithm specified in Section 7.2 of RFC 3841. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4569: Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Registration of the Message Media Feature Tag
Informational- G. Camarillo
- July 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document registers with the IANA a new media feature tag associated with the 'message' media type. This media feature tag indicates that a particular device supports 'message' as a streaming media type. Media feature tags can be used to route calls to devices that support certain features. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document registers with the IANA a new media feature tag associated with the 'message' media type. This media feature tag indicates that a particular device supports 'message' as a streaming media type. Media feature tags can be used to route calls to devices that support certain features. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4590: RADIUS Extension for Digest Authentication
Proposed Standard- B. Sterman
- D. Sadolevsky
- D. Schwartz
- D. Williams
- W. Beck
- July 2006
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) protocol to enable support of Digest Authentication, for use with HTTP-style protocols like the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and HTTP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 5090
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) protocol to enable support of Digest Authentication, for use with HTTP-style protocols like the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and HTTP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4538: Request Authorization through Dialog Identification in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- June 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines the Target-Dialog header field for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), and the corresponding option tag, tdialog. This header field is used in requests that create SIP dialogs. It indicates to the recipient that the sender is aware of an existing dialog with the recipient, either because the sender is on the other side of that dialog, or because it has access to the dialog identifiers. The recipient can then authorize the request based on this awareness. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines the Target-Dialog header field for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), and the corresponding option tag, tdialog. This header field is used in requests that create SIP dialogs. It indicates to the recipient that the sender is aware of an existing dialog with the recipient, either because the sender is on the other side of that dialog, or because it has access to the dialog identifiers. The recipient can then authorize the request based on this awareness. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4483: A Mechanism for Content Indirection in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Messages
Proposed Standard- E. Burger
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the URL MIME External-Body Access-Type to satisfy the content indirection requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). These extensions are aimed at allowing any MIME part in a SIP message to be referred to indirectly via a URI. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the URL MIME External-Body Access-Type to satisfy the content indirection requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). These extensions are aimed at allowing any MIME part in a SIP message to be referred to indirectly via a URI. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4485: Guidelines for Authors of Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is a flexible yet simple tool for establishing interactive communications sessions across the Internet. Part of this flexibility is the ease with which it can be extended. In order to facilitate effective and interoperable extensions to SIP, some guidelines need to be followed when developing SIP extensions. This document outlines a set of such guidelines for authors of SIP extensions. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is a flexible yet simple tool for establishing interactive communications sessions across the Internet. Part of this flexibility is the ease with which it can be extended. In order to facilitate effective and interoperable extensions to SIP, some guidelines need to be followed when developing SIP extensions. This document outlines a set of such guidelines for authors of SIP extensions. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4508: Conveying Feature Tags with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER Method
Proposed Standard- O. Levin
- A. Johnston
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The SIP "Caller Preferences" extension defined in RFC 3840 provides a mechanism that allows a SIP request to convey information relating to the originator's capabilities and preferences for handling of that request. The SIP REFER method defined in RFC 3515 provides a mechanism that allows one party to induce another to initiate a SIP request. This document extends the REFER method to use the mechanism of RFC 3840. By doing so, the originator of a REFER may inform the recipient as to the characteristics of the target that the induced request is expected to reach. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The SIP "Caller Preferences" extension defined in RFC 3840 provides a mechanism that allows a SIP request to convey information relating to the originator's capabilities and preferences for handling of that request. The SIP REFER method defined in RFC 3515 provides a mechanism that allows one party to induce another to initiate a SIP request. This document extends the REFER method to use the mechanism of RFC 3840. By doing so, the originator of a REFER may inform the recipient as to the characteristics of the target that the induced request is expected to reach. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4504: SIP Telephony Device Requirements and Configuration
Informational- H. Sinnreich
- S. Lass
- C. Stredicke
- May 2006
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes the requirements for SIP telephony devices, based on the deployment experience of large numbers of SIP phones and PC clients using different implementations in various networks. The objectives of the requirements are a well-defined set of interoperability and multi-vendor-supported core features, so as to enable similar ease of purchase, installation, and operation as found for PCs, PDAs, analog feature phones or mobile phones.
We present a glossary of the most common settings and some of the more widely used values for some settings. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes the requirements for SIP telephony devices, based on the deployment experience of large numbers of SIP phones and PC clients using different implementations in various networks. The objectives of the requirements are a well-defined set of interoperability and multi-vendor-supported core features, so as to enable similar ease of purchase, installation, and operation as found for PCs, PDAs, analog feature phones or mobile phones.
We present a glossary of the most common settings and some of the more widely used values for some settings. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4475: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Torture Test Messages
Informational- R. Sparks
- A. Hawrylyshen
- A. Johnston
- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This informational document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) test messages designed to exercise and "torture" a SIP implementation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This informational document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) test messages designed to exercise and "torture" a SIP implementation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4488: Suppression of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER Method Implicit Subscription
Proposed Standard- O. Levin
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER extension as defined in RFC 3515 automatically establishes a typically short-lived event subscription used to notify the party sending a REFER request about the receiver's status in executing the transaction requested by the REFER. These notifications are not needed in all cases. This specification provides a way to prevent the automatic establishment of an event subscription and subsequent notifications using a new SIP extension header field that may be included in a REFER request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER extension as defined in RFC 3515 automatically establishes a typically short-lived event subscription used to notify the party sending a REFER request about the receiver's status in executing the transaction requested by the REFER. These notifications are not needed in all cases. This specification provides a way to prevent the automatic establishment of an event subscription and subsequent notifications using a new SIP extension header field that may be included in a REFER request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4497: BCP 117: Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and QSIG
Best Current Practice- J. Elwell
- F. Derks
- P. Mourot
- O. Rousseau
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and QSIG within corporate telecommunication networks (also known as enterprise networks). SIP is an Internet application-layer control (signalling) protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating sessions with one or more participants. These sessions include, in particular, telephone calls. QSIG is a signalling protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating circuit-switched calls (in particular, telephone calls) within Private Integrated Services Networks (PISNs). QSIG is specified in a number of Ecma Standards and published also as ISO/IEC standards. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document specifies interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and QSIG within corporate telecommunication networks (also known as enterprise networks). SIP is an Internet application-layer control (signalling) protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating sessions with one or more participants. These sessions include, in particular, telephone calls. QSIG is a signalling protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating circuit-switched calls (in particular, telephone calls) within Private Integrated Services Networks (PISNs). QSIG is specified in a number of Ecma Standards and published also as ISO/IEC standards. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 4457: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-User-Database Private-Header (P-Header)
Informational- G. Camarillo
- G. Blanco
- April 2006
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-User-Database Private-Header (P-header). This header field is used in the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) to provide SIP registrars and SIP proxy servers with the address of the database that contains the user profile of the user that generated a particular request. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document specifies the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-User-Database Private-Header (P-header). This header field is used in the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) to provide SIP registrars and SIP proxy servers with the address of the database that contains the user profile of the user that generated a particular request. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4453: Requirements for Consent-Based Communications in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- G. Camarillo
- D. Willis
- April 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports communications across many media types, including real-time audio, video, text, instant messaging, and presence. In its current form, it allows session invitations, instant messages, and other requests to be delivered from one party to another without requiring explicit consent of the recipient. Without such consent, it is possible for SIP to be used for malicious purposes, including spam and denial-of-service attacks. This document identifies a set of requirements for extensions to SIP that add consent-based communications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports communications across many media types, including real-time audio, video, text, instant messaging, and presence. In its current form, it allows session invitations, instant messages, and other requests to be delivered from one party to another without requiring explicit consent of the recipient. Without such consent, it is possible for SIP to be used for malicious purposes, including spam and denial-of-service attacks. This document identifies a set of requirements for extensions to SIP that add consent-based communications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4458: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) URIs for Applications such as Voicemail and Interactive Voice Response (IVR)
Informational- C. Jennings
- F. Audet
- J. Elwell
- April 2006
- IETF publication
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is often used to initiate connections to applications such as voicemail or interactive voice recognition systems. This specification describes a convention for forming SIP service URIs that request particular services based on redirecting targets from such applications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is often used to initiate connections to applications such as voicemail or interactive voice recognition systems. This specification describes a convention for forming SIP service URIs that request particular services based on redirecting targets from such applications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4411: Extending the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Reason Header for Preemption Events
Proposed Standard- J. Polk
- February 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document proposes an IANA Registration extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Reason Header to be included in a BYE Method Request as a result of a session preemption event, either at a user agent (UA), or somewhere in the network involving a reservation-based protocol such as the Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) or Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS). This document does not attempt to address routers failing in the packet path; instead, it addresses a deliberate tear down of a flow between UAs, and informs the terminated UA(s) with an indication of what occurred. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document proposes an IANA Registration extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Reason Header to be included in a BYE Method Request as a result of a session preemption event, either at a user agent (UA), or somewhere in the network involving a reservation-based protocol such as the Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) or Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS). This document does not attempt to address routers failing in the packet path; instead, it addresses a deliberate tear down of a flow between UAs, and informs the terminated UA(s) with an indication of what occurred. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4412: Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- J. Polk
- February 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines two new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header fields for communicating resource priority, namely, "Resource-Priority" and "Accept-Resource-Priority". The "Resource-Priority" header field can influence the behavior of SIP user agents (such as telephone gateways and IP telephones) and SIP proxies. It does not directly influence the forwarding behavior of IP routers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines two new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header fields for communicating resource priority, namely, "Resource-Priority" and "Accept-Resource-Priority". The "Resource-Priority" header field can influence the behavior of SIP user agents (such as telephone gateways and IP telephones) and SIP proxies. It does not directly influence the forwarding behavior of IP routers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4353: A Framework for Conferencing with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Rosenberg
- February 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the initiation, modification, and termination of media sessions between user agents. These sessions are managed by SIP dialogs, which represent a SIP relationship between a pair of user agents. Because dialogs are between pairs of user agents, SIP's usage for two-party communications (such as a phone call), is obvious. Communications sessions with multiple participants, generally known as conferencing, are more complicated. This document defines a framework for how such conferencing can occur. This framework describes the overall architecture, terminology, and protocol components needed for multi-party conferencing. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the initiation, modification, and termination of media sessions between user agents. These sessions are managed by SIP dialogs, which represent a SIP relationship between a pair of user agents. Because dialogs are between pairs of user agents, SIP's usage for two-party communications (such as a phone call), is obvious. Communications sessions with multiple participants, generally known as conferencing, are more complicated. This document defines a framework for how such conferencing can occur. This framework describes the overall architecture, terminology, and protocol components needed for multi-party conferencing. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4320: Actions Addressing Identified Issues with the Session Initiation Protocol's (SIP) Non-INVITE Transaction
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- January 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes modifications to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to address problems that have been identified with the SIP non-INVITE transaction. These modifications reduce the probability of messages losing the race condition inherent in the non-INVITE transaction and reduce useless network traffic. They also improve the robustness of SIP networks when elements stop responding. These changes update behavior defined in RFC 3261. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes modifications to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to address problems that have been identified with the SIP non-INVITE transaction. These modifications reduce the probability of messages losing the race condition inherent in the non-INVITE transaction and reduce useless network traffic. They also improve the robustness of SIP networks when elements stop responding. These changes update behavior defined in RFC 3261. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4321: Problems Identified Associated with the Session Initiation Protocol's (SIP) Non-INVITE Transaction
Informational- R. Sparks
- January 2006
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes several problems that have been identified with the Session Initiation Protocol's (SIP) non-INVITE transaction. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes several problems that have been identified with the Session Initiation Protocol's (SIP) non-INVITE transaction. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4354: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package and Data Format for Various Settings in Support for the Push-to-Talk over Cellular (PoC) Service
Informational- M. Garcia-Martin
- January 2006
- IETF publication
Abstract
The Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) is defining the Push-to-talk over Cellular (PoC) service where SIP is the protocol used to establish half-duplex media sessions across different participants, to send instant messages, etc. This document defines a SIP event package to support publication, subscription, and notification of additional capabilities required by the PoC service. This SIP event package is applicable to the PoC service and may not be applicable to the general Internet. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) is defining the Push-to-talk over Cellular (PoC) service where SIP is the protocol used to establish half-duplex media sessions across different participants, to send instant messages, etc. This document defines a SIP event package to support publication, subscription, and notification of additional capabilities required by the PoC service. This SIP event package is applicable to the PoC service and may not be applicable to the general Internet. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4240: Basic Network Media Services with SIP
Informational- E. Burger
- J. Van Dyke
- A. Spitzer
- December 2005
- IETF publication
Abstract
In SIP-based networks, there is a need to provide basic network media services. Such services include network announcements, user interaction, and conferencing services. These services are basic building blocks, from which one can construct interesting applications. In order to have interoperability between servers offering these building blocks (also known as Media Servers) and application developers, one needs to be able to locate and invoke such services in a well defined manner.
This document describes a mechanism for providing an interoperable interface between Application Servers, which provide application services to SIP-based networks, and Media Servers, which provide the basic media processing building blocks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
In SIP-based networks, there is a need to provide basic network media services. Such services include network announcements, user interaction, and conferencing services. These services are basic building blocks, from which one can construct interesting applications. In order to have interoperability between servers offering these building blocks (also known as Media Servers) and application developers, one needs to be able to locate and invoke such services in a well defined manner.
This document describes a mechanism for providing an interoperable interface between Application Servers, which provide application services to SIP-based networks, and Media Servers, which provide the basic media processing building blocks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4235: An INVITE-Initiated Dialog Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- R. Mahy
- November 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a dialog event package for the SIP Events architecture, along with a data format used in notifications for this package. The dialog package allows users to subscribe to another user and to receive notification of the changes in state of INVITE-initiated dialog usages in which the subscribed-to user is involved. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a dialog event package for the SIP Events architecture, along with a data format used in notifications for this package. The dialog package allows users to subscribe to another user and to receive notification of the changes in state of INVITE-initiated dialog usages in which the subscribed-to user is involved. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4245: High-Level Requirements for Tightly Coupled SIP Conferencing
Informational- O. Levin
- R. Even
- November 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document examines a wide range of conferencing requirements for tightly coupled SIP conferences. Separate documents will map the requirements to existing protocol primitives, define new protocol extensions, and introduce new protocols as needed. Together, these documents will provide a guide for building interoperable SIP conferencing applications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document examines a wide range of conferencing requirements for tightly coupled SIP conferences. Separate documents will map the requirements to existing protocol primitives, define new protocol extensions, and introduce new protocols as needed. Together, these documents will provide a guide for building interoperable SIP conferencing applications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4244: An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information
Proposed Standard- M. Barnes
- November 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a standard mechanism for capturing the history information associated with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request. This capability enables many enhanced services by providing the information as to how and why a call arrives at a specific application or user. This document defines a new optional SIP header, History-Info, for capturing the history information in requests. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 7044
Abstract
This document defines a standard mechanism for capturing the history information associated with a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request. This capability enables many enhanced services by providing the information as to how and why a call arrives at a specific application or user. This document defines a new optional SIP header, History-Info, for capturing the history information in requests. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4189: Requirements for End-to-Middle Security for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- K. Ono
- S. Tachimoto
- October 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) does not always trust all intermediaries in its request path to inspect its message bodies and/or headers contained in its message. The UA might want to protect the message bodies and/or headers from intermediaries, except those that provide services based on its content. This situation requires a mechanism called "end-to-middle security" to secure the information passed between the UA and intermediaries, which does not interfere with end-to-end security. This document defines a set of requirements for a mechanism to achieve end-to-middle security. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) does not always trust all intermediaries in its request path to inspect its message bodies and/or headers contained in its message. The UA might want to protect the message bodies and/or headers from intermediaries, except those that provide services based on its content. This situation requires a mechanism called "end-to-middle security" to secure the information passed between the UA and intermediaries, which does not interfere with end-to-end security. This document defines a set of requirements for a mechanism to achieve end-to-middle security. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4168: The Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) as a Transport for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- G. Camarillo
- October 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism for usage of SCTP (the Stream Control Transmission Protocol) as the transport mechanism between SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) entities. SCTP is a new protocol that provides several features that may prove beneficial for transport between SIP entities that exchange a large amount of messages, including gateways and proxies. As SIP is transport-independent, support of SCTP is a relatively straightforward process, nearly identical to support for TCP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism for usage of SCTP (the Stream Control Transmission Protocol) as the transport mechanism between SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) entities. SCTP is a new protocol that provides several features that may prove beneficial for transport between SIP entities that exchange a large amount of messages, including gateways and proxies. As SIP is transport-independent, support of SCTP is a relatively straightforward process, nearly identical to support for TCP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4123: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-H.323 Interworking Requirements
Informational- H. Schulzrinne
- C. Agboh
- July 2005
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document describes the requirements for the logical entity known as the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow the interworking between SIP and H.323. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes the requirements for the logical entity known as the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-H.323 Interworking Function (SIP-H.323 IWF) that will allow the interworking between SIP and H.323. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4117: Transcoding Services Invocation in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Using Third Party Call Control (3pcc)
Informational- G. Camarillo
- E. Burger
- H. Schulzrinne
- A. van Wijk
- June 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to invoke transcoding services using Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and third party call control. This way of invocation meets the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired individuals. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes how to invoke transcoding services using Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and third party call control. This way of invocation meets the requirements for SIP regarding transcoding services invocation to support deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired individuals. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4092: Usage of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) Alternative Network Address Types (ANAT) Semantics in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- J. Rosenberg
- June 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to use the Alternative Network Address Types (ANAT) semantics of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) grouping framework in SIP. In particular, we define the sdp-anat SIP option-tag. This SIP option-tag ensures that SDP session descriptions that use ANAT are only handled by SIP entities with ANAT support. To justify the need for such a SIP option-tag, we describe what could possibly happen if an ANAT-unaware SIP entity tried to handle media lines grouped with ANAT. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 5245
Abstract
This document describes how to use the Alternative Network Address Types (ANAT) semantics of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) grouping framework in SIP. In particular, we define the sdp-anat SIP option-tag. This SIP option-tag ensures that SDP session descriptions that use ANAT are only handled by SIP entities with ANAT support. To justify the need for such a SIP option-tag, we describe what could possibly happen if an ANAT-unaware SIP entity tried to handle media lines grouped with ANAT. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4083: Input 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Release 5 Requirements on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- M. Garcia-Martin
- May 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has selected Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as the session establishment protocol for the 3GPP IP Multimedia Core Network Subsystem (IMS). IMS is part of Release 5 of the 3GPP specifications. Although SIP is a protocol that fulfills most of the requirements for establishing a session in an IP network, SIP has never been evaluated against the specific 3GPP requirements for operation in a cellular network. In this document, we express the requirements identified by 3GPP to support SIP for Release 5 of the 3GPP IMS in cellular networks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has selected Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as the session establishment protocol for the 3GPP IP Multimedia Core Network Subsystem (IMS). IMS is part of Release 5 of the 3GPP specifications. Although SIP is a protocol that fulfills most of the requirements for establishing a session in an IP network, SIP has never been evaluated against the specific 3GPP requirements for operation in a cellular network. In this document, we express the requirements identified by 3GPP to support SIP for Release 5 of the 3GPP IMS in cellular networks. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4028: Session Timers in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- S. Donovan
- J. Rosenberg
- May 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension allows for a periodic refresh of SIP sessions through a \%re-INVITE or UPDATE request. The refresh allows both user agents and proxies to determine whether the SIP session is still active. The extension defines two new header fields: \%Session-Expires, which conveys the lifetime of the session, and \%Min-SE, which conveys the minimum allowed value for the session timer. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension allows for a periodic refresh of SIP sessions through a \%re-INVITE or UPDATE request. The refresh allows both user agents and proxies to determine whether the SIP session is still active. The extension defines two new header fields: \%Session-Expires, which conveys the lifetime of the session, and \%Min-SE, which conveys the minimum allowed value for the session timer. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4032: Update to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Preconditions Framework
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- P. Kyzivat
- March 2005
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3312, which defines the framework for preconditions in SIP. We provide guidelines for authors of new precondition types and describe how to use SIP preconditions in situations that involve session mobility. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3312, which defines the framework for preconditions in SIP. We provide guidelines for authors of new precondition types and describe how to use SIP preconditions in situations that involve session mobility. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3976: Interworking SIP and Intelligent Network (IN) Applications
Informational- V. K. Gurbani
- F. Haerens
- V. Rastogi
- January 2005
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) services such as 800-number routing (freephone), time-and-day routing, credit-card calling, and virtual private network (mapping a private network number into a public number) are realized by the Intelligent Network (IN). This document addresses means to support existing IN services from Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) endpoints for an IP-host-to-phone call. The call request is originated on a SIP endpoint, but the services to the call are provided by the data and procedures resident in the PSTN/IN. To provide IN services in a transparent manner to SIP endpoints, this document describes the mechanism for interworking SIP and Intelligent Network Application Part (INAP). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) services such as 800-number routing (freephone), time-and-day routing, credit-card calling, and virtual private network (mapping a private network number into a public number) are realized by the Intelligent Network (IN). This document addresses means to support existing IN services from Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) endpoints for an IP-host-to-phone call. The call request is originated on a SIP endpoint, but the services to the call are provided by the data and procedures resident in the PSTN/IN. To provide IN services in a transparent manner to SIP endpoints, this document describes the mechanism for interworking SIP and Intelligent Network Application Part (INAP). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3959: The Early Session Disposition Type for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- December 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a new disposition type (early-session) for the Content-Disposition header field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The treatment of "early-session" bodies is similar to the treatment of "session" bodies. That is, they follow the offer/answer model. Their only difference is that session descriptions whose disposition type is "early-session" are used to establish early media sessions within early dialogs, as opposed to regular sessions within regular dialogs. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new disposition type (early-session) for the Content-Disposition header field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The treatment of "early-session" bodies is similar to the treatment of "session" bodies. That is, they follow the offer/answer model. Their only difference is that session descriptions whose disposition type is "early-session" are used to establish early media sessions within early dialogs, as opposed to regular sessions within regular dialogs. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3960: Early Media and Ringing Tone Generation in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- G. Camarillo
- H. Schulzrinne
- December 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes how to manage early media in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) using two models: the gateway model and the application server model. It also describes the inputs one needs to consider in defining local policies for ringing tone generation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes how to manage early media in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) using two models: the gateway model and the application server model. It also describes the inputs one needs to consider in defining local policies for ringing tone generation. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3968: BCP 98: The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Header Field Parameter Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Best Current Practice- G. Camarillo
- December 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document creates an Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header field parameters and parameter values. It also lists the already existing parameters and parameter values to be used as the initial entries for this registry. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document creates an Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) header field parameters and parameter values. It also lists the already existing parameters and parameter values to be used as the initial entries for this registry. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 3969: BCP 99: The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Parameter Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Best Current Practice- G. Camarillo
- December 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document creates an Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and SIPS Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) parameters, and their values. It also lists the already existing parameters to be used as initial values for that registry. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document creates an Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and SIPS Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) parameters, and their values. It also lists the already existing parameters to be used as initial values for that registry. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 3944: H.350 Directory Services
Informational- T. Johnson
- S. Okubo
- S. Campos
- December 2004
- IETF publication
Abstract
The International Telecommunications Union Standardization Sector (ITU-T) has created the H.350 series of Recommendations that specify directory services architectures in support of multimedia conferencing protocols. The goal of the architecture is to 'directory enable' multimedia conferencing so that these services can leverage existing identity management and enterprise directories. A particular goal is to enable an enterprise or service provider to maintain a canonical source of users and their multimedia conferencing systems, so that multiple call servers from multiple vendors, supporting multiple protocols, can all access the same data store. Because SIP is an IETF standard, the contents of H.350 and H.350.4 are made available via this document to the IETF community. This document contains the entire normative text of ITU-T Recommendations H.350 and H.350.4 in sections 4 and 5, respectively. The remaining sections are included only in this document, not in the ITU-T version. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The International Telecommunications Union Standardization Sector (ITU-T) has created the H.350 series of Recommendations that specify directory services architectures in support of multimedia conferencing protocols. The goal of the architecture is to 'directory enable' multimedia conferencing so that these services can leverage existing identity management and enterprise directories. A particular goal is to enable an enterprise or service provider to maintain a canonical source of users and their multimedia conferencing systems, so that multiple call servers from multiple vendors, supporting multiple protocols, can all access the same data store. Because SIP is an IETF standard, the contents of H.350 and H.350.4 are made available via this document to the IETF community. This document contains the entire normative text of ITU-T Recommendations H.350 and H.350.4 in sections 4 and 5, respectively. The remaining sections are included only in this document, not in the ITU-T version. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3903: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for Event State Publication
Proposed Standard- A. Niemi
- November 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for publishing event state used within the SIP Events framework. The first application of this extension is for the publication of presence information.
The mechanism described in this document can be extended to support publication of any event state for which there exists an appropriate event package. It is not intended to be a general-purpose mechanism for transport of arbitrary data, as there are better-suited mechanisms for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for publishing event state used within the SIP Events framework. The first application of this extension is for the publication of presence information.
The mechanism described in this document can be extended to support publication of any event state for which there exists an appropriate event package. It is not intended to be a general-purpose mechanism for transport of arbitrary data, as there are better-suited mechanisms for this purpose. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3911: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Join" Header
Proposed Standard- R. Mahy
- D. Petrie
- October 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a new header for use with SIP multi-party applications and call control. The Join header is used to logically join an existing SIP dialog with a new SIP dialog. This primitive can be used to enable a variety of features, for example: "Barge-In", answering-machine-style "Message Screening" and "Call Center Monitoring". Note that definition of these example features is non-normative. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new header for use with SIP multi-party applications and call control. The Join header is used to logically join an existing SIP dialog with a new SIP dialog. This primitive can be used to enable a variety of features, for example: "Barge-In", answering-machine-style "Message Screening" and "Call Center Monitoring". Note that definition of these example features is non-normative. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3910: The SPIRITS (Services in PSTN requesting Internet Services) Protocol
Proposed Standard- V. Gurbani
- A. Brusilovsky
- I. Faynberg
- J. Gato
- H. Lu
- M. Unmehopa
- October 2004
- IETF publication
- Transport Area
Abstract
This document describes the Services in PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) requesting Internet Services (SPIRITS) protocol. The purpose of the SPIRITS protocol is to support services that originate in the cellular or wireline PSTN and necessitate interactions between the PSTN and the Internet. On the PSTN side, the SPIRITS services are most often initiated from the Intelligent Network (IN) entities. Internet Call Waiting and Internet Caller-ID Delivery are examples of SPIRITS services, as are location-based services on the cellular network. The protocol defines the building blocks from which many other services can be built. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes the Services in PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) requesting Internet Services (SPIRITS) protocol. The purpose of the SPIRITS protocol is to support services that originate in the cellular or wireline PSTN and necessitate interactions between the PSTN and the Internet. On the PSTN side, the SPIRITS services are most often initiated from the Intelligent Network (IN) entities. Internet Call Waiting and Internet Caller-ID Delivery are examples of SPIRITS services, as are location-based services on the cellular network. The protocol defines the building blocks from which many other services can be built. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3891: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Replaces" Header
Proposed Standard- R. Mahy
- B. Biggs
- R. Dean
- September 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a new header for use with Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) multi-party applications and call control. The Replaces header is used to logically replace an existing SIP dialog with a new SIP dialog. This primitive can be used to enable a variety of features, for example: "Attended Transfer" and "Call Pickup". Note that the definition of these example features is non-normative. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new header for use with Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) multi-party applications and call control. The Replaces header is used to logically replace an existing SIP dialog with a new SIP dialog. This primitive can be used to enable a variety of features, for example: "Attended Transfer" and "Call Pickup". Note that the definition of these example features is non-normative. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3892: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Referred-By Mechanism
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- September 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER method provides a mechanism where one party (the referrer) gives a second party (the referee) an arbitrary URI to reference. If that URI is a SIP URI, the referee will send a SIP request, often an INVITE, to that URI (the refer target). This document extends the REFER method, allowing the referrer to provide information about the REFER request to the refer target using the referee as an intermediary. This information includes the identity of the referrer and the URI to which the referrer referred. The mechanism utilizes S/MIME to help protect this information from a malicious intermediary. This protection is optional, but a recipient may refuse to accept a request unless it is present. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) REFER method provides a mechanism where one party (the referrer) gives a second party (the referee) an arbitrary URI to reference. If that URI is a SIP URI, the referee will send a SIP request, often an INVITE, to that URI (the refer target). This document extends the REFER method, allowing the referrer to provide information about the REFER request to the refer target using the referee as an intermediary. This information includes the identity of the referrer and the URI to which the referrer referred. The mechanism utilizes S/MIME to help protect this information from a malicious intermediary. This protection is optional, but a recipient may refuse to accept a request unless it is present. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3893: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Authenticated Identity Body (AIB) Format
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- September 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
RFC 3261 introduces the concept of adding an S/MIME body to a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request or response in order to provide reference integrity over its headers. This document provides a more specific mechanism to derive integrity and authentication properties from an 'authenticated identity body', a digitally-signed SIP message, or message fragment. A standard format for such bodies (known as Authenticated Identity Bodies, or AIBs) is given in this document. Some considerations for the processing of AIBs by recipients of SIP messages with such bodies are also given. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
RFC 3261 introduces the concept of adding an S/MIME body to a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) request or response in order to provide reference integrity over its headers. This document provides a more specific mechanism to derive integrity and authentication properties from an 'authenticated identity body', a digitally-signed SIP message, or message fragment. A standard format for such bodies (known as Authenticated Identity Bodies, or AIBs) is given in this document. Some considerations for the processing of AIBs by recipients of SIP messages with such bodies are also given. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3840: Indicating User Agent Capabilities in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- P. Kyzivat
- August 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines mechanisms by which a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agent can convey its capabilities and characteristics to other user agents and to the registrar for its domain. This information is conveyed as parameters of the Contact header field. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This specification defines mechanisms by which a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user agent can convey its capabilities and characteristics to other user agents and to the registrar for its domain. This information is conveyed as parameters of the Contact header field. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3841: Caller Preferences for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- P. Kyzivat
- August 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a set of extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) which allow a caller to express preferences about request handling in servers. These preferences include the ability to select which Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) a request gets routed to, and to specify certain request handling directives in proxies and redirect servers. It does so by defining three new request header fields, Accept-Contact, Reject-Contact, and Request-Disposition, which specify the caller's preferences. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a set of extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) which allow a caller to express preferences about request handling in servers. These preferences include the ability to select which Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) a request gets routed to, and to specify certain request handling directives in proxies and redirect servers. It does so by defining three new request header fields, Accept-Contact, Reject-Contact, and Request-Disposition, which specify the caller's preferences. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3842: A Message Summary and Message Waiting Indication Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- R. Mahy
- August 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package to carry message waiting status and message summaries from a messaging system to an interested User Agent. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package to carry message waiting status and message summaries from a messaging system to an interested User Agent. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3853: S/MIME Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Requirement for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- July 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
RFC 3261 currently specifies 3DES as the mandatory-to-implement ciphersuite for implementations of S/MIME in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document updates the normative guidance of RFC 3261 to require the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for S/MIME. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
RFC 3261 currently specifies 3DES as the mandatory-to-implement ciphersuite for implementations of S/MIME in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This document updates the normative guidance of RFC 3261 to require the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for S/MIME. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3824: Using E.164 numbers with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Peterson
- H. Liu
- J. Yu
- B. Campbell
- June 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
There are a number of contexts in which telephone numbers are employed by Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) applications, many of which can be addressed by ENUM. Although SIP was one of the primary applications for which ENUM was created, there is nevertheless a need to define procedures for integrating ENUM with SIP implementations. This document illustrates how the two protocols might work in concert, and clarifies the authoring and processing of ENUM records for SIP applications. It also provides guidelines for instances in which ENUM, for whatever reason, cannot be used to resolve a telephone number. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
There are a number of contexts in which telephone numbers are employed by Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) applications, many of which can be addressed by ENUM. Although SIP was one of the primary applications for which ENUM was created, there is nevertheless a need to define procedures for integrating ENUM with SIP implementations. This document illustrates how the two protocols might work in concert, and clarifies the authoring and processing of ENUM records for SIP applications. It also provides guidelines for instances in which ENUM, for whatever reason, cannot be used to resolve a telephone number. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3764: enumservice registration for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Addresses-of-Record
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- April 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document registers an Electronic Number (ENUM) service for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), pursuant to the guidelines in RFC 3761. Specifically, this document focuses on provisioning SIP addresses-of-record in ENUM. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document registers an Electronic Number (ENUM) service for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), pursuant to the guidelines in RFC 3761. Specifically, this document focuses on provisioning SIP addresses-of-record in ENUM. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3725: BCP 85: Best Current Practices for Third Party Call Control (3pcc) in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Best Current Practice- J. Rosenberg
- J. Peterson
- H. Schulzrinne
- G. Camarillo
- April 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Third party call control refers to the ability of one entity to create a call in which communication is actually between other parties. Third party call control is possible using the mechanisms specified within the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). However, there are several possible approaches, each with different benefits and drawbacks. This document discusses best current practices for the usage of SIP for third party call control. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
Third party call control refers to the ability of one entity to create a call in which communication is actually between other parties. Third party call control is possible using the mechanisms specified within the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). However, there are several possible approaches, each with different benefits and drawbacks. This document discusses best current practices for the usage of SIP for third party call control. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 3680: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Registrations
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- March 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for registrations. Through its REGISTER method, SIP allows a user agent to create, modify, and delete registrations. Registrations can also be altered by administrators in order to enforce policy. As a result, these registrations represent a piece of state in the network that can change dynamically. There are many cases where a user agent would like to be notified of changes in this state. This event package defines a mechanism by which those user agents can request and obtain such notifications. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) event package for registrations. Through its REGISTER method, SIP allows a user agent to create, modify, and delete registrations. Registrations can also be altered by administrators in order to enforce policy. As a result, these registrations represent a piece of state in the network that can change dynamically. There are many cases where a user agent would like to be notified of changes in this state. This event package defines a mechanism by which those user agents can request and obtain such notifications. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3702: Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- J. Loughney
- G. Camarillo
- February 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
As Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) services are deployed on the Internet, there is a need for authentication, authorization, and accounting of SIP sessions. This document sets out the basic requirements for this work. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
As Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) services are deployed on the Internet, there is a need for authentication, authorization, and accounting of SIP sessions. This document sets out the basic requirements for this work. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3665: BCP 75: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Basic Call Flow Examples
Best Current Practice- A. Johnston
- S. Donovan
- R. Sparks
- C. Cunningham
- K. Summers
- January 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) call flows. Elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents and Clients, SIP Proxy and Redirect Servers. Scenarios include SIP Registration and SIP session establishment. Call flow diagrams and message details are shown.
Abstract
This document gives examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) call flows. Elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents and Clients, SIP Proxy and Redirect Servers. Scenarios include SIP Registration and SIP session establishment. Call flow diagrams and message details are shown.
RFC 3666: BCP 76: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) Call Flows
Best Current Practice- A. Johnston
- S. Donovan
- R. Sparks
- C. Cunningham
- K. Summers
- January 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document contains best current practice examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) call flows showing interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). Elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents, SIP Proxy Servers, and PSTN Gateways. Scenarios include SIP to PSTN, PSTN to SIP, and PSTN to PSTN via SIP. PSTN telephony protocols are illustrated using ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network), ISUP (ISDN User Part), and FGB (Feature Group B) circuit associated signaling. PSTN calls are illustrated using global telephone numbers from the PSTN and private extensions served on by a PBX (Private Branch Exchange). Call flow diagrams and message details are shown.
Abstract
This document contains best current practice examples of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) call flows showing interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). Elements in these call flows include SIP User Agents, SIP Proxy Servers, and PSTN Gateways. Scenarios include SIP to PSTN, PSTN to SIP, and PSTN to PSTN via SIP. PSTN telephony protocols are illustrated using ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network), ISUP (ISDN User Part), and FGB (Feature Group B) circuit associated signaling. PSTN calls are illustrated using global telephone numbers from the PSTN and private extensions served on by a PBX (Private Branch Exchange). Call flow diagrams and message details are shown.
RFC 3603: Private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Proxy-to-Proxy Extensions for Supporting the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture
Informational- W. Marshall
- F. Andreasen
- October 2003
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
In order to deploy a residential telephone service at very large scale across different domains, it is necessary for trusted elements owned by different service providers to exchange trusted information that conveys customer-specific information and expectations about the parties involved in the call. This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) (RFC3261) for supporting the exchange of customer information and billing information between trusted entities in the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture. These extensions provide mechanisms for access network coordination to prevent theft of service, customer originated trace of harassing calls, support for operator services and emergency services, and support for various other regulatory issues. The use of the extensions is only applicable within closed administrative domains, or among federations of administrative domains with previously agreed-upon policies where coordination of charging and other functions is required.
- Obsoleted by RFC 5503
Abstract
In order to deploy a residential telephone service at very large scale across different domains, it is necessary for trusted elements owned by different service providers to exchange trusted information that conveys customer-specific information and expectations about the parties involved in the call. This document describes private extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) (RFC3261) for supporting the exchange of customer information and billing information between trusted entities in the PacketCable Distributed Call Signaling Architecture. These extensions provide mechanisms for access network coordination to prevent theft of service, customer originated trace of harassing calls, support for operator services and emergency services, and support for various other regulatory issues. The use of the extensions is only applicable within closed administrative domains, or among federations of administrative domains with previously agreed-upon policies where coordination of charging and other functions is required.
RFC 3608: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension Header Field for Service Route Discovery During Registration
Proposed Standard- D. Willis
- B. Hoeneisen
- October 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) extension header field used in conjunction with responses to REGISTER requests to provide a mechanism by which a registrar may inform a registering user agent (UA) of a service route that the UA may use to request outbound services from the registrar's domain.
Abstract
This document defines a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) extension header field used in conjunction with responses to REGISTER requests to provide a mechanism by which a registrar may inform a registering user agent (UA) of a service route that the UA may use to request outbound services from the registrar's domain.
RFC 3581: An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Symmetric Response Routing
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- August 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) operates over UDP and TCP, among others. When used with UDP, responses to requests are returned to the source address the request came from, and to the port written into the topmost Via header field value of the request. This behavior is not desirable in many cases, most notably, when the client is behind a Network Address Translator (NAT). This extension defines a new parameter for the Via header field, called "rport", that allows a client to request that the server send the response back to the source IP address and port from which the request originated. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) operates over UDP and TCP, among others. When used with UDP, responses to requests are returned to the source address the request came from, and to the port written into the topmost Via header field value of the request. This behavior is not desirable in many cases, most notably, when the client is behind a Network Address Translator (NAT). This extension defines a new parameter for the Via header field, called "rport", that allows a client to request that the server send the response back to the source IP address and port from which the request originated. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3578: Mapping of Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) User Part (ISUP) Overlap Signalling to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A. B. Roach
- J. Peterson
- L. Ong
- August 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a way to map Integrated Services Digital Network User Part (ISUP) overlap signalling to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This mechanism might be implemented when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a way to map Integrated Services Digital Network User Part (ISUP) overlap signalling to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This mechanism might be implemented when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3319: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- B. Volz
- July 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a DHCPv6 option that contains a list of domain
names or IPv6 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
Abstract
This document defines a DHCPv6 option that contains a list of domain
names or IPv6 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
RFC 3515: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer Method
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- April 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines the REFER method. This Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) extension requests that the recipient REFER to a resource provided in the request. It provides a mechanism allowing the party sending the REFER to be notified of the outcome of the referenced request. This can be used to enable many applications, including call transfer. In addition to the REFER method, this document defines the refer event package and the Refer-To request header. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines the REFER method. This Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) extension requests that the recipient REFER to a resource provided in the request. It provides a mechanism allowing the party sending the REFER to be notified of the outcome of the referenced request. This can be used to enable many applications, including call transfer. In addition to the REFER method, this document defines the refer event package and the Refer-To request header. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3487: Requirements for Resource Priority Mechanisms for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Informational- H. Schulzrinne
- March 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document summarizes requirements for prioritizing access to circuit-switched network, end system and proxy resources for emergency preparedness communications using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document summarizes requirements for prioritizing access to circuit-switched network, end system and proxy resources for emergency preparedness communications using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3486: Compressing the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- February 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism to signal that compression is desired for one or more Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) messages. It also states when it is appropriate to send compressed SIP messages to a SIP entity. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism to signal that compression is desired for one or more Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) messages. It also states when it is appropriate to send compressed SIP messages to a SIP entity. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3313: Private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extensions for Media Authorization
Informational- W. Marshall
- January 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes the need for QoS and media authorization and
defines a SIP extension that can be used to integrate QoS admission
control with call signaling and help guard against denial of service
attacks. The use of this extension is only applicable in
administrative domains, or among federations of administrative
domains with previously agreed-upon policies, where both the SIP
proxy authorizing the QoS, and the policy control of the underlying
network providing the QoS belong to that administrative domain or
federation of domains.
Abstract
This document describes the need for QoS and media authorization and
defines a SIP extension that can be used to integrate QoS admission
control with call signaling and help guard against denial of service
attacks. The use of this extension is only applicable in
administrative domains, or among federations of administrative
domains with previously agreed-upon policies, where both the SIP
proxy authorizing the QoS, and the policy control of the underlying
network providing the QoS belong to that administrative domain or
federation of domains.
RFC 3455: Private Header (P-Header) Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)
Informational- M. Garcia-Martin
- E. Henrikson
- D. Mills
- January 2003
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document describes a set of private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) headers (P-headers) used by the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), along with their applicability, which is limited to particular environments. The P-headers are for a variety of purposes within the networks that the partners use, including charging and information about the networks a call traverses. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
- Obsoleted by RFC 7315
Abstract
This document describes a set of private Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) headers (P-headers) used by the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), along with their applicability, which is limited to particular environments. The P-headers are for a variety of purposes within the networks that the partners use, including charging and information about the networks a call traverses. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3329: Security Mechanism Agreement for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Arkko
- V. Torvinen
- G. Camarillo
- A. Niemi
- T. Haukka
- January 2003
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines new functionality for negotiating the security
mechanisms used between a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user
agent and its next-hop SIP entity. This new functionality
supplements the existing methods of choosing security mechanisms
between SIP entities.
Abstract
This document defines new functionality for negotiating the security
mechanisms used between a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) user
agent and its next-hop SIP entity. This new functionality
supplements the existing methods of choosing security mechanisms
between SIP entities.
RFC 3427: Change Process for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Best Current Practice- A. Mankin
- S. Bradner
- R. Mahy
- D. Willis
- J. Ott
- B. Rosen
- December 2002
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This memo documents a process intended to apply architectural discipline to the future development of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). There have been concerns with regards to new SIP proposals. Specifically, that the addition of new SIP features can be damaging towards security and/or greatly increase the complexity of the protocol. The Transport Area directors, along with the SIP and Session Initiation Proposal Investigation (SIPPING) working group chairs, have provided suggestions for SIP modifications and extensions. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
- Obsoleted by RFC 5727
Abstract
This memo documents a process intended to apply architectural discipline to the future development of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). There have been concerns with regards to new SIP proposals. Specifically, that the addition of new SIP features can be damaging towards security and/or greatly increase the complexity of the protocol. The Transport Area directors, along with the SIP and Session Initiation Proposal Investigation (SIPPING) working group chairs, have provided suggestions for SIP modifications and extensions. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 3327: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension Header Field for Registering Non-Adjacent Contacts
Proposed Standard- D. Willis
- B. Hoeneisen
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The REGISTER function is used in a SIP system primarily to associate
a temporary contact address with an address-of-record. This contact
is generally in the form of a URI, such as Contact:
<sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.com> and is generally dynamic and associated
with the IP address or hostname of the SIP UA. The problem is that
network topology may have one or more SIP proxies between the UA and
the registrar, such that any request travelling from the user's home
network to the registered UA must traverse these proxies. The
REGISTER method does not give us a mechanism to discover and record
this sequence of proxies in the registrar for future use. This
document defines an extension header field, 'Path' which provides
such a mechanism
Abstract
The REGISTER function is used in a SIP system primarily to associate
a temporary contact address with an address-of-record. This contact
is generally in the form of a URI, such as Contact:
<sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.com> and is generally dynamic and associated
with the IP address or hostname of the SIP UA. The problem is that
network topology may have one or more SIP proxies between the UA and
the registrar, such that any request travelling from the user's home
network to the registered UA must traverse these proxies. The
REGISTER method does not give us a mechanism to discover and record
this sequence of proxies in the registrar for future use. This
document defines an extension header field, 'Path' which provides
such a mechanism
RFC 3326: The Reason Header Field for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- D. Oran
- G. Camarillo
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The REGISTER function is used in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) system primarily to associate a temporary contact address with an address-of-record. This contact is generally in the form of a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), such as Contact: <sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.com> and is generally dynamic and associated with the IP address or hostname of the SIP User Agent (UA). The problem is that network topology may have one or more SIP proxies between the UA and the registrar, such that any request traveling from the user's home network to the registered UA must traverse these proxies. The REGISTER method does not give us a mechanism to discover and record this sequence of proxies in the registrar for future use. This document defines an extension header field, "Path" which provides such a mechanism. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The REGISTER function is used in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) system primarily to associate a temporary contact address with an address-of-record. This contact is generally in the form of a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), such as Contact: <sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.com> and is generally dynamic and associated with the IP address or hostname of the SIP User Agent (UA). The problem is that network topology may have one or more SIP proxies between the UA and the registrar, such that any request traveling from the user's home network to the registered UA must traverse these proxies. The REGISTER method does not give us a mechanism to discover and record this sequence of proxies in the registrar for future use. This document defines an extension header field, "Path" which provides such a mechanism. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3398: Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) User Part (ISUP) to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Mapping
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- A. B. Roach
- J. Peterson
- L. Ong
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes a way to perform the mapping between two
signaling protocols: the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the
ISDN User Part (ISUP) of SS7. This mechanism might be implemented
when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves
interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN).
Abstract
This document describes a way to perform the mapping between two
signaling protocols: the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the
ISDN User Part (ISUP) of SS7. This mechanism might be implemented
when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves
interworking with the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN).
RFC 3428: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for Instant Messaging
Proposed Standard- B. Campbell
- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- C. Huitema
- D. Gurle
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
Instant Messaging (IM) refers to the transfer of messages between users in near real-time. These messages are usually, but not required to be, short. IMs are often used in a conversational mode, that is, the transfer of messages back and forth is fast enough for participants to maintain an interactive conversation. This document proposes the MESSAGE method, an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that allows the transfer of Instant Messages. Since the MESSAGE request is an extension to SIP, it inherits all the request routing and security features of that protocol. MESSAGE requests carry the content in the form of MIME body parts. MESSAGE requests do not themselves initiate a SIP dialog; under normal usage each Instant Message stands alone, much like pager messages. MESSAGE requests may be sent in the context of a dialog initiated by some other SIP request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Instant Messaging (IM) refers to the transfer of messages between users in near real-time. These messages are usually, but not required to be, short. IMs are often used in a conversational mode, that is, the transfer of messages back and forth is fast enough for participants to maintain an interactive conversation. This document proposes the MESSAGE method, an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) that allows the transfer of Instant Messages. Since the MESSAGE request is an extension to SIP, it inherits all the request routing and security features of that protocol. MESSAGE requests carry the content in the form of MIME body parts. MESSAGE requests do not themselves initiate a SIP dialog; under normal usage each Instant Message stands alone, much like pager messages. MESSAGE requests may be sent in the context of a dialog initiated by some other SIP request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3323: A Privacy Mechanism for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines new mechanisms for the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) in support of privacy. Specifically, guidelines are
provided for the creation of messages that do not divulge personal
identity information. A new 'privacy service' logical role for
intermediaries is defined to answer some privacy requirements that
user agents cannot satisfy themselves. Finally, means are presented
by which a user can request particular functions from a privacy
service.
Abstract
This document defines new mechanisms for the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) in support of privacy. Specifically, guidelines are
provided for the creation of messages that do not divulge personal
identity information. A new 'privacy service' logical role for
intermediaries is defined to answer some privacy requirements that
user agents cannot satisfy themselves. Finally, means are presented
by which a user can request particular functions from a privacy
service.
RFC 3324: Short Term Requirements for Network Asserted Identity
Informational- M. Watson
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
There is no requirement for identities asserted by a UA in a SIP
message to be anything other than the user's desired alias.
A Network Asserted Identity is an identity initially derived by a SIP
network intermediary as a result of an authentication process. This
draft describes short term requirements for the exchange of Network
Asserted Identities within networks of securely interconnected
trusted nodes and to User Agents securely connected to such networks.
Abstract
There is no requirement for identities asserted by a UA in a SIP
message to be anything other than the user's desired alias.
A Network Asserted Identity is an identity initially derived by a SIP
network intermediary as a result of an authentication process. This
draft describes short term requirements for the exchange of Network
Asserted Identities within networks of securely interconnected
trusted nodes and to User Agents securely connected to such networks.
RFC 3325: Private Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Asserted Identity within Trusted Networks
Informational- C. Jennings
- J. Peterson
- M. Watson
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes private extensions to SIP that enable a
network of trusted SIP servers to assert the identity of
authenticated users, and the application of existing privacy
mechanisms to the identity problem. The use of these extensions is
only applicable inside an administrative domain with previously
agreed-upon policies for generation, transport and usage of such
information. This document does NOT offer a general privacy or
identity model suitable for use between different trust domains, or
use in the Internet at large.
Abstract
This document describes private extensions to SIP that enable a
network of trusted SIP servers to assert the identity of
authenticated users, and the application of existing privacy
mechanisms to the identity problem. The use of these extensions is
only applicable inside an administrative domain with previously
agreed-upon policies for generation, transport and usage of such
information. This document does NOT offer a general privacy or
identity model suitable for use between different trust domains, or
use in the Internet at large.
RFC 3420: Internet Media Type message/sipfrag
Proposed Standard- R. Sparks
- November 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document registers the message/sipfrag Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) media type. This type is similar to message/sip, but allows certain subsets of well formed Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) messages to be represented instead of requiring a complete SIP message. In addition to end-to-end security uses, message/sipfrag is used with the REFER method to convey information about the status of a referenced request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document registers the message/sipfrag Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) media type. This type is similar to message/sip, but allows certain subsets of well formed Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) messages to be represented instead of requiring a complete SIP message. In addition to end-to-end security uses, message/sipfrag is used with the REFER method to convey information about the status of a referenced request. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3312: Integration of Resource Management and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- G. Camarillo
- W. Marshall
- J. Rosenberg
- October 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a generic framework for preconditions which is
extensible through IANA registration. This document also discusses
how network quality of service can be made a precondition to
establishment of sessions initiated by the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP). These preconditions require that the participant
reserve network resources before continuing with the session. We do
not define new quality of service reservation mechanisms; these
preconditions simply require a participant to use existing resource
reservation mechanisms before beginning the session
Abstract
This document defines a generic framework for preconditions which is
extensible through IANA registration. This document also discusses
how network quality of service can be made a precondition to
establishment of sessions initiated by the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP). These preconditions require that the participant
reserve network resources before continuing with the session. We do
not define new quality of service reservation mechanisms; these
preconditions simply require a participant to use existing resource
reservation mechanisms before beginning the session
RFC 3311: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) UPDATE Method
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- October 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This specification defines the new UPDATE method for the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP). UPDATE allows a client to update
parameters of a session (such as the set of media streams and their
codecs) but has no impact on the state of a dialog. In that sense, it
is like a re-INVITE, but can be sent before the initial INVITE has
completed. This makes it very useful for updating session parameters
within early dialogs.
Abstract
This specification defines the new UPDATE method for the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP). UPDATE allows a client to update
parameters of a session (such as the set of media streams and their
codecs) but has no impact on the state of a dialog. In that sense, it
is like a re-INVITE, but can be sent before the initial INVITE has
completed. This makes it very useful for updating session parameters
within early dialogs.
RFC 3310: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Digest Authentication Using Authentication and Key Agreement (AKA)
Informational- A. Niemi
- J. Arkko
- V. Torvinen
- September 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Authentication Framework
includes two authentication schemes: Basic and Digest. Both schemes
employ a shared secret based mechanism for access authentication.
The Authentication and Key Agreement (AKA) mechanism performs user
authentication and session key distribution in Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System (UMTS) networks. AKA is a challenge-
response based mechanism that uses symmetric cryptography. This memo
specifies an AKA based one-time password generation mechanism for
HTTP Digest access authentication.
Abstract
The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Authentication Framework
includes two authentication schemes: Basic and Digest. Both schemes
employ a shared secret based mechanism for access authentication.
The Authentication and Key Agreement (AKA) mechanism performs user
authentication and session key distribution in Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System (UMTS) networks. AKA is a challenge-
response based mechanism that uses symmetric cryptography. This memo
specifies an AKA based one-time password generation mechanism for
HTTP Digest access authentication.
RFC 3372: BCP 63: Session Initiation Protocol for Telephones (SIP-T): Context and Architectures
Best Current Practice- A. Vemuri
- J. Peterson
- September 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The popularity of gateways that interwork between the PSTN (Public
Switched Telephone Network) and SIP networks has motivated the
publication of a set ofcommon practices that can assure consistent
behavior across implementations. This document taxonomizes the uses
of PSTN-SIP gateways, provides uses cases, and identifies mechanisms
necessary for interworking. The mechanisms detail how SIP provides
for both 'encapsulation' (carriage of PSTN signaling across a SIP
network) and 'translation' (protocol mapping).
Abstract
The popularity of gateways that interwork between the PSTN (Public
Switched Telephone Network) and SIP networks has motivated the
publication of a set ofcommon practices that can assure consistent
behavior across implementations. This document taxonomizes the uses
of PSTN-SIP gateways, provides uses cases, and identifies mechanisms
necessary for interworking. The mechanisms detail how SIP provides
for both 'encapsulation' (carriage of PSTN signaling across a SIP
network) and 'translation' (protocol mapping).
RFC 3361: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP-for-IPv4) Option for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- August 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-for-IPv4 option that contains a list of
domain names or IPv4 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-for-IPv4 option that contains a list of
domain names or IPv4 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
RFC 3351: User Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) in Support of Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech-impaired Individuals
Informational- N. Charlton
- M. Gasson
- G. Gybels
- M. Spanner
- A. van Wijk
- August 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document aims to present a set of SIP user requirements that
support communications for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired
individuals. These user requirements address the current difficulties
of deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired individuals in using
communications facilities, while acknowledging the multi-functional
potential of SIP-based communications.
A number of issues related to these user requirements are further
raised in this document.
Also included are some real world scenarios and some technical
requirements to show the robustness of these requirements on a
concept-level.
Abstract
This document aims to present a set of SIP user requirements that
support communications for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired
individuals. These user requirements address the current difficulties
of deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired individuals in using
communications facilities, while acknowledging the multi-functional
potential of SIP-based communications.
A number of issues related to these user requirements are further
raised in this document.
Also included are some real world scenarios and some technical
requirements to show the robustness of these requirements on a
concept-level.
RFC 3261: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- G. Camarillo
- A. Johnston
- J. Peterson
- R. Sparks
- M. Handley
- E. Schooler
- July 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), an application-layer control (signaling) protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating sessions with one or more participants. These sessions include Internet telephone calls, multimedia distribution, and multimedia conferences. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), an application-layer control (signaling) protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating sessions with one or more participants. These sessions include Internet telephone calls, multimedia distribution, and multimedia conferences. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3262: Reliability of Provisional Responses in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- July 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) providing reliable provisional response messages. This extension uses the option tag 100rel and defines the Provisional Response ACKnowledgement (PRACK) method. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) providing reliable provisional response messages. This extension uses the option tag 100rel and defines the Provisional Response ACKnowledgement (PRACK) method. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3263: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers
Proposed Standard- J. Rosenberg
- H. Schulzrinne
- July 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) uses DNS procedures to allow a client to resolve a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) into the IP address, port, and transport protocol of the next hop to contact. It also uses DNS to allow a server to send a response to a backup client if the primary client has failed. This document describes those DNS procedures in detail. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) uses DNS procedures to allow a client to resolve a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) into the IP address, port, and transport protocol of the next hop to contact. It also uses DNS to allow a server to send a response to a backup client if the primary client has failed. This document describes those DNS procedures in detail. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3265: Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific Event Notification
Proposed Standard- A. B. Roach
- July 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The purpose of this extension is to provide an extensible framework by which SIP nodes can request notification from remote nodes indicating that certain events have occurred. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 6665
Abstract
This document describes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). The purpose of this extension is to provide an extensible framework by which SIP nodes can request notification from remote nodes indicating that certain events have occurred. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3204: MIME media types for ISUP and QSIG Objects
Proposed Standard- E. Zimmerer
- J. Peterson
- A. Vemuri
- L. Ong
- F. Audet
- M. Watson
- M. Zonoun
- December 2001
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document describes MIME types for application/ISUP and application/QSIG objects for use in SIP applications, according to the rules defined in RFC 2048. These types can be used to identify ISUP and QSIG objects within a SIP message such as INVITE or INFO, as might be implemented when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves interworking to the PSTN. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes MIME types for application/ISUP and application/QSIG objects for use in SIP applications, according to the rules defined in RFC 2048. These types can be used to identify ISUP and QSIG objects within a SIP message such as INVITE or INFO, as might be implemented when using SIP in an environment where part of the call involves interworking to the PSTN. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3087: Control of Service Context using SIP Request-URI
Informational- B. Campbell
- R. Sparks
- April 2001
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This memo describes a useful way to conceptualize the use of the standard SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Request-URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) that the authors and many members of the SIP community think is suitable as a convention. It does not define any new protocol with respect to RFC 2543. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This memo describes a useful way to conceptualize the use of the standard SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Request-URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) that the authors and many members of the SIP community think is suitable as a convention. It does not define any new protocol with respect to RFC 2543. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 3050: Common Gateway Interface for SIP
Informational- J. Lennox
- H. Schulzrinne
- J. Rosenberg
- January 2001
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This document defines a SIP CGI interface for providing SIP services on a SIP server. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document defines a SIP CGI interface for providing SIP services on a SIP server. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 2976: The SIP INFO Method
Proposed Standard- S. Donovan
- October 2000
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document proposes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension adds the INFO method to the SIP protocol. The intent of the INFO method is to allow for the carrying of session related control information that is generated during a session. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 6086
Abstract
This document proposes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension adds the INFO method to the SIP protocol. The intent of the INFO method is to allow for the carrying of session related control information that is generated during a session. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2848: The PINT Service Protocol: Extensions to SIP and SDP for IP Access to Telephone Call Services
Proposed Standard- S. Petrack
- L. Conroy
- June 2000
- IETF publication
- Transport Area
Abstract
This document contains the specification of the PINT Service Protocol 1.0, which defines a protocol for invoking certain telephone services from an IP network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document contains the specification of the PINT Service Protocol 1.0, which defines a protocol for invoking certain telephone services from an IP network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2543: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol
Proposed Standard- M. Handley
- H. Schulzrinne
- E. Schooler
- J. Rosenberg
- March 1999
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is an application-layer control (signaling) protocol for creating, modifying and terminating sessions with one or more participants. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 3261, RFC 3262, RFC 3263, RFC 3264, RFC 3265
Abstract
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is an application-layer control (signaling) protocol for creating, modifying and terminating sessions with one or more participants. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1694: Definitions of Managed Objects for SMDS Interfaces using SMIv2
Draft Standard- T. Brown
- K. Tesink
- August 1994
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing objects for SMDS access interfaces. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing objects for SMDS access interfaces. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1454: Comparison of Proposals for Next Version of IP
Informational- T. Dixon
- May 1993
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This is a slightly edited reprint of RARE Technical Report (RTC(93)004). This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard.
Abstract
This is a slightly edited reprint of RARE Technical Report (RTC(93)004). This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard.
RFC 1304: Definitions of Managed Objects for the SIP Interface Type
Proposed Standard- T. Cox
- K. Tesink
- February 1992
- IETF publication
- Network Management Area
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing SIP (SMDS Interface Protocol) objects. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 1694
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing SIP (SMDS Interface Protocol) objects. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Subscribe to SIP
Get notified when:
- RFC changes to status, obsoleted by, updates, updated by, or subseries.
- New RFC added to this subject or below
- The subject was merged into another.