Internet Engineering Task Force B. Campbell, Ed.
Internet-Draft Oracle
Updates: 5727 (if approved) A. Cooper
Intended status: Best Current Practice Cisco
Expires: December 21, 2015 B. Leiba
Huawei
June 19, 2015
Improving the Organizational Flexibility of the SIP Change Process.
draft-campbell-art-rfc5727-update-02
Abstract
RFC 5727 defines several processes for the 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.
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 December 21, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SIP-Change Update June 2015
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Dispatch-Style Working Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Decoupling the SIP-Change Process from the RAI Area . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2. Informative Reverences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
[RFC5727] describes processes for evolving and maintaining the
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] and related technologies
in the former Real-time Application and Infrastructure (RAI) area.
These processes are collectively known as the "SIP Change Process".
While areas do not normally have "charters" per se, RFC 5727 has
effectively served as a charter for RAI. The language in RFC 5727 is
tightly bound to the RAI area and to the the DISPATCH and SIPCORE
working groups.
At the time of this writing, the RAI area recently merged with the
Applications (APP) area to form a new Applications and Real-Time
(ART) area. This document updates RFC 5727 to remove its dependency
on RAI and its working group structure.
RFC 5727 specifies that the DISPATCH working group assesses potential
new work for the area, and determines where such work should occur.
DISPATCH does not itself take on such new work. The SIPCORE working
group is responsible for maintenance of SIP. Other RAI working
groups develop extensions to SIP that do not change the core
protocol, new applications of SIP, and other technologies for
interactive communication among humans. This document further
generalizes the processes of the DISPATCH working group so that they
can be applied to other areas, or to clusters of technologies within
an area.
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SIP-Change Update June 2015
While the reorganization is expected to involve merging RAI with the
Applications (APP) area and renaming the resulting area, the updates
in this document do not depend on that. Rather, the authors seek to
future-proof the SIP Change Process against future reorganizations.
This document does not change any other aspect of RFC 5727. While
areas and working groups may change over time, the rules and
procedures for changing SIP and other RAI protocols remain the same,
until such time that they are updated by future documents.
2. Dispatch-Style Working Groups
The DISPATCH working group has proven successful at managing new work
for the RAI area. Areas may choose to adopt DISPATCH-like
procedures, either for an entire area, or for technology-clusters in
an area or across areas. A "Dispatch-Style" working group operates
according to procedures similar to those used for DISPATCH.
The "Dispatch Style" includes the following essential elements:
o The working group evaluates proposals for new work for an area, or
for a well-defined technology cluster. It acts as a filter for
the area or cluster to determine whether a proposal is a
reasonable use of or addition to associated technologies. This
determination may depend upon established criteria (for example,
the SIP Change Process), the experience and expertise of the
participants, or a combination of the two.
o The dispatch-style working group determines an appropriate venue
for the work. The venue could be an existing working group. If
no appropriate group exist, it may develop a charter for a BoF, a
new working group, or an exploratory group [RFC5111]. The working
group may also determine that a proposal should not be acted upon
at the time.
o The dispatch-style working group does not complete the proposed
work. It may, however, adopt milestones needed to properly
dispatch the work. For example, it may produce charter text for a
BoF or a new working group, an initial problem statement, or
documentation about why certain work was not pursued.
Nothing in this list prevents existing working groups from directly
adopting new work that reasonably fits their charters. For
borderline cases, the decision whether new work should start in a
dispatch-style group, or in an existing group is a judgement call
among the responsible Area Directors and chairs. Likewise, in cases
where an area has multiple dispatch-style groups for different
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SIP-Change Update June 2015
purposes or technology clusters, the decision about which group will
handle a particular proposal is a judgement call.
The charter of a dispatch-style group should make that fact clear,
either by referencing this document, or by directly describing
similar procedures.
3. Decoupling the SIP-Change Process from the RAI Area
This document clarifies that the SIP Change Process is not bound to
any particular area or working group structure. All references to
the RAI area in RFC 5727 should be interpreted as "the cluster of SIP
and closely related application and infrastructure technologies, as
well as other technologies designed primarily for interactive
communication among humans."
While the DISPATCH and SIPCORE working groups are expected to
continue in their current capacities, nothing in the SIP Change
Process prevents their responsibilities from being assigned to other
working groups in the future.
All other aspects of the SIP-Change process are to continue as
described in RFC 5727.
4. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests to IANA.
5. Security Considerations
This document discusses the roles and responsibilities of areas and
working groups. It does not create new security considerations in
the conventional sense.
However, organizational structures come with their own security
considerations. A dispatch-stye working group has the potential to
concentrate the control of work for an area or cluster in the hands
of a much smaller set of people than those in the whole area or
cluster. This could have the effect of a "Denial of Service Attack"
against the area or cluster. Likewise, such a concentration could
reduce the quality of decisions about new work. Care must be taken
to avoid this risk. The best mitigation is active participation in
the group by as many people in the area or cluster as possible.
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SIP-Change Update June 2015
6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all the previous authors of the SIP
Change Process for their contributions. Jon Peterson, Cullen
Jennings, and Robert Sparks authored RFC 5727. That RFC obsoleted
[RFC3427], which was in turn written by Allison Mankin, Scott
Bradner, Rohan Mahy, Dean Willis, Brian Rosen, and Joerg Ott.
The authors additionally thank the present and past chairs of
DISPATCH and SIPCORE, as well as all the participants in the RAI area
since its inception.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC5727] Peterson, J., Jennings, C., and R. Sparks, "Change Process
for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Real-
time Applications and Infrastructure Area", BCP 67, RFC
5727, March 2010.
7.2. Informative Reverences
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
June 2002.
[RFC3427] Mankin, A., Bradner, S., Mahy, R., Willis, D., Ott, J.,
and B. Rosen, "Change Process for the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3427, December 2002.
[RFC5111] Aboba, B. and L. Dondeti, "Experiment in Exploratory Group
Formation within the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF)", RFC 5111, January 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Ben Campbell (editor)
Oracle
Email: ben@nostrum.com
ALissa Cooper
Cisco
Email: alcoop@cisco.com
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SIP-Change Update June 2015
Barry Leiba
Huawei
Email: barryleiba@computer.org
Campbell, et al. Expires December 21, 2015 [Page 6]