SIP Call-Info Parameters for Labeling Calls
draft-sipcore-callinfo-spam-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-03-07
Replaces draft-schulzrinne-dispatch-callinfo-spam
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
SIPCORE                                                   H. Schulzrinne
Internet-Draft                                                       FCC
Intended status: Standards Track                           March 7, 2017
Expires: September 8, 2017

              SIP Call-Info Parameters for Labeling Calls
                     draft-sipcore-callinfo-spam-00

Abstract

   Called parties often wish to decide whether to accept, reject or
   redirect calls based on the likely nature of the call.  For example,
   they may want to reject unwanted telemarketing or fraudulent calls,
   but accept emergency alerts from numbers not in their address book.
   This document describes SIP Call-Info parameters and a feature tag
   that allow originating, intermediate and terminating SIP entities to
   label calls as to their type, spam probability and references to
   additional information.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 8, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must

Schulzrinne             Expires September 8, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               Call-Info Spam                   March 2017

   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Normative Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Overview of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Call Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  ABNF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     8.1.  SIP Call-Info Header Field Parameters . . . . . . . . . .   6
     8.2.  SIP Global Feature-Capability Indicator . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.3.  SIP Call-Info Type Parameter  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   In many countries, an increasing number of calls are unwanted
   [RFC5039], as they might be fraudulent, telemarketing or the
   receiving party does not want to be disturbed by, say, surveys or
   solicitation by charities.  Currently, called parties have to rely
   exclusively on the caller's number or, if provided, caller name, but
   unwanted callers may not provide their true name or use a name that
   misleads, e.g., "Cardholder Services".  On the other hand, many calls
   from unknown numbers may be important to the called party, whether
   this is an emergency alert from their emergency management office or
   a reminder about a doctor's appointment.  Since many subscribers now
   reject all calls from unknown numbers, such calls may also be
   inadvertently be left unanswered.  Users may also install smartphone
   apps that can benefit from additional information in making decisions
   as to whether to ring, reject or redirect a call.

   To allow called parties to make more informed decisions on how to
   handle incoming calls from unknown callers, we describe a new set of
Show full document text