XCON M. Dolly
Internet-Draft G. Munson
Expires: August 16, 2006 AT&T Labs
J. Rafferty
Brooktrout
February 12, 2006
Media Control Protocol Framework
draft-dolly-xcon-mediacntrlframe-01.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 16, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
This document provides requirements for a protocol, that will enable
one physical entity that includes the media policy server,
notification server and the focus to interact with one or more
physical entities that serves as mixer or media server. It will
address all phases and aspects of media handling in a conferencing
service including announcements and IVR functionality.
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Table of Contents
1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Media Control Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Operational Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Changes from previous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 10
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
1. Overview
The IETF XCON conferencing framework presents an architecture that is
built of several functional entities. The framework document does
not specify the protocols between the functional entities since it is
considered out of scope.
There is an interest to work on a protocol that will enable one
physical entity that includes the media policy server, notification
server and the focus to interact with one or more physical entities
that serves as mixer or media server.
The document will present the requirements for such a protocol. It
will address all phases and aspects of media handling in a enhanced
conferencing service including announcements and IVR functionality.
The following items are out of scope of this document:
Media session establishment.
Mechanism for MS to advertise its capabilities.
Mechanism for the AS to discsover a MS.
Ability to move an existing conference from the current Media
Servers supporting it to other Media Servers, where the latter
have been identified to the AS.
2. Terminology
The Media Server work uses when appropriate and expands on the
terminology introduced in the SIP conferencing framework and XCON
conferencing framework. The following additional terms are defined
for use within the Media Server work.
Application Server (AS) - The application server includes the
conference policy server, the focus and the conference notification
server as defined in draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-framework.
Media Server (MS) - The media server includes the mixer as defined in
draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-framework. The media server source
media streams for announcements, it process media streams for
functions like DTMF detection and transcoding. The media server may
also record media streams for supporting IVR functions like
announcing participants
Notification - A notification is used when there is a need to report
event related information from the MS to the AS.
Request - A request is sent from the controlling entity, such as an
Application Server, to another resource, such as a Media Server,
asking that a particular type of operation be executed.
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Response - A response is used to signal information such as an
acknowledgement or error code in reply to a previously issued
request.
3. Requirements
3.1. Media Control Requirements
The following are the media control requirements:
REQ-MCP-01 - There MUST be a requirement for a control protocol that
will enable one or more Application Servers to control a media
server.
REQ-MCP-02 The protocol MUST be independent from the transport
protocol.
REQ-MCP-03 The protocol MUST use a reliable transport protocol.
REQ-MCP-04 - The application scope of the protocol shall include
Enhanced Conferencing Control and Interactive Voice Response.
Though the protocol enables these services, the functionality is
invoked through other mechanisms.
REQ-MCP-05 - The protocol will utilize an XML markup language.
REQ-MCP-06 - A Media Server SHOULD be application/service
independent. It should be possible to have a many-to-many
relationship between Application Servers and Media Servers that
use this protocol.
REQ-MCP-07 - Media types that are supported in the context of the
applications shall include audio, tones and video.
REQ-MCP-08 - The protocol should allow, but must not require, a media
server resource broker or intermediate proxy to exist between the
Application Server and Media Server.
REQ-MCP-09 - One channel could control multiple conferences, but you
could have multiple channels controlling one or more conferences.
There can be a connection per conference or one connection from
the AS to MS for controlling many conferences
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
REQ-MCP-10 - On the control channel, there shall be requests to the
MS, responses from the MS and notifications to the AS.
REQ-MCP-11 - SIP SHALL be used to establish and modify RTP
connections to a Media Server.
REQ-MCP-12 - It should be possible to support a single conference
spanning multiple Media Servers.
Note: The previous draft used "must". It is probably true that
spanning multiple MSes can be accomplished by the AS and does not
require anything in the protocol for the scenarios we have in
mind. However, the concern is that if this requirement is treated
too lightly, one may end up with a protocol that precludes its
support. Therefore, we are reluctant to weaken this requirement
any further than "should".
REQ-MCP-13 - It must be possible to split call legs individually or
in groups away from a main conference on a given Media Server,
without performing SIP re-establishment of the call legs to the MS
(e.g., for purposes such as performing IVR with a single call leg
or creating sub-conferences, not for creating entirely new
conferences).
REQ-MCP-14 - The protocol should be extendable, facilitating forward
and backward compatability.
3.2. Operational Requirements
REQ-MCP-15 - The AS-MS control protocol must allow the AS to audit
the MS state.
4. Security Considerations
As an XML markup, all of the security considerations of RFC3023
[RFC3023] and RFC3406 [RFC3406] must be met. Pay particular
attention to the robustness requirements of parsing XML.
5. Changes from previous
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-sip-gruu]
Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Agent (UA) URIs (GRUU) in the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP)", draft-ietf-sip-gruu-01 (work in progress),
February 2004.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
[RFC3023] Murata, M., St. Laurent, S., and D. Kohn, "XML Media
Types", RFC 3023, January 2001.
[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.
[RFC3265] Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific
Event Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002.
[RFC3406] Daigle, L., van Gulik, D., Iannella, R., and P. Faltstrom,
"Uniform Resource Names (URN) Namespace Definition
Mechanisms", BCP 66, RFC 3406, October 2002.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
January 2004.
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20010502]
Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn,
"XML Schema Part 1: Structures", W3C REC REC-xmlschema-1-
20010502, May 2001.
6.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-simple-event-list]
Roach, A., Rosenberg, J., and B. Campbell, "A Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for
Resource Lists", draft-ietf-simple-event-list-05 (work in
progress), August 2004.
[I-D.ietf-sipping-app-interaction-framework]
Rosenberg, J., "A Framework for Application Interaction in
the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
draft-ietf-sipping-app-interaction-framework-01 (work in
progress), February 2004.
[I-D.ietf-sipping-dialog-package]
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An INVITE Inititiated
Dialog Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP", draft-ietf-sipping-dialog-package-02 (work in
progress), June 2003.
[I-D.vandyke-mscml]
Burger, E., Van Dyke, J., and A. Spitzer, "Media Server
Control Markup Language (MSCML) and Protocol",
draft-vandyke-mscml-04 (work in progress), March 2004.
[IEEE.1003.1-2001]
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
"Information Technology - Portable Operating System
Interface (POSIX) - Part 1: Base Definitions, Chapter 9",
IEEE Standard 1003.1, June 2001.
[RFC1889] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
Applications", RFC 1889, January 1996.
[RFC2327] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description
Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998.
[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Nielsen, H.,
Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[RFC2833] Schulzrinne, H. and S. Petrack, "RTP Payload for DTMF
Digits, Telephony Tones and Telephony Signals", RFC 2833,
May 2000.
[RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
June 2002.
[RFC3435] Andreasen, F. and B. Foster, "Media Gateway Control
Protocol (MGCP) Version 1.0", RFC 3435, January 2003.
[RFC3525] Groves, C., Pantaleo, M., Anderson, T., and T. Taylor,
"Gateway Control Protocol Version 1", RFC 3525, June 2003.
[W3C.REC-xml-20001006]
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., and E. Maler,
"Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition)",
W3C REC REC-xml-20001006, October 2000.
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Appendix A. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Eric Burger for his guidance, and
Roni Even for earlier requirements work in this area.
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Authors' Addresses
Martin Dolly
AT&T Labs
200 Laurel Avenue
Middletown, NJ 07748
USA
Phone:
Email: mdolly@att.com
URI:
Gary Munson
AT&T Labs
200 Laurel Avenue
Middletown, NJ 07748
USA
Phone:
Email: gamunson@att.com
URI:
James Rafferty
Brooktrout
410 First Avenue
Needham, MA 02494
US
Phone:
Email: jraff@brooktrout.com
URI:
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Media Control Protocol Framework February 2006
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Dolly, et al. Expires August 16, 2006 [Page 10]