Technical Summary
This draft proposes a general signaling transport protocol. It is based
on the use of existing transport and security protocols under a common
messaging layer. GIST does not handle signaling application state
itself; in that crucial respect, it differs from application signaling
protocols such as SIP, RTSP, and the control component of FTP, but this
follows the basic NSIS 2-layer signaling model defined in RFC 4080.
Working Group Summary
This document was previously sent back from the IESG. The WG has now
addressed the issue raised by the IESG review and thinks it ready to
progress.
Protocol Quality
Magnus Westerlund was the responsible AD. This document was reviewed by
the working group chair as well as the WG. There are 6 or more independent
implementations of GIST, and there was an interop event prior to the
Paris IETF meeting. IETF Last call comments was received and has been
incorporated. Then it was sent back to the WG to take care of a number of
important to resolve issues. It has now gone through the WG process, and a
second IETF last call.
RFC-editor Note
Section 5.1, third paragraph:
OLD:
Messages with missing, duplicate or invalid objects
for the message type MUST be rejected with an "Object Type Error"
message with the appropriate subcode (Appendix A.4.4.9).
NEW:
Messages with missing, duplicate or invalid objects
for the message type MUST be rejected with an "Object Type Error"
message with the appropriate subcode (Appendix A.4.4.9). Note that
unknown objects indicate explicitly how they should be treated and
are not covered by the above statement.