Network Working Group P. Jones (Ed.)
Internet Draft J. Polk (Ed.)
Intended status: Standards Track G. Salgueiro
Expires: March 24, 2015 C. Pearce
Cisco Systems
September 24, 2014
End-to-End Session Identification in IP-Based Multimedia
Communication Networks
draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-10
Abstract
This document describes an end-to-end Session Identifier for use in
IP-based multimedia communication systems that enables endpoints,
intermediate 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.
This document also describes a backwards compatibility mechanism for
an existing "in the wild" session identifier implementation that is
sufficiently different from the procedures defined in this document.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and 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 March 24, 2015.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 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
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...................................................3
2. Conventions used in this document..............................3
3. Session Identifier Requirements and Use Cases..................4
4. Constructing and Conveying the Session Identifier..............4
4.1. Constructing the Session Identifier.......................4
4.2. Conveying the Session Identifier..........................5
5. The Session-ID Header Field....................................6
6. Endpoint Behavior..............................................7
7. Processing by Intermediaries...................................8
8. Associating Endpoints in a Multipoint Conference...............9
9. Various Call Flow Operations..................................10
9.1. Basic Call with 2 UUIDs..................................10
9.2. Basic Call Transfer using REFER..........................14
9.3. Basic Call Transfer using reINVITE.......................16
9.4. Single Focus Conferencing................................17
9.5. Single Focus Conferencing using WebEx....................19
9.6. Cascading Conference Bridges.............................20
9.6.1. Establishing a Cascaded Conference..................20
9.6.2. Calling into Cascaded Conference Bridges............21
9.7. Basic 3PCC for two UAs...................................22
9.8. Handling in 100 Trying SIP Response and CANCEL Request...23
9.8.1. Handling in a 100 Trying SIP Response...............23
9.8.2. Handling a CANCEL SIP Request.......................24
9.9. Out-of-dialog REFER Transaction..........................25
10. Compatibility with a Previous Implementation.................26
11. Security Considerations......................................27
12. IANA Considerations..........................................28
12.1. Registration of the "Session-ID" Header Field...........28
12.2. Registration of the "remote" Parameter..................28
13. Acknowledgments..............................................29
14. References...................................................29
14.1. Normative References....................................29
14.2. Informative References..................................29
Author's Addresses...............................................31
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
1. Introduction
IP-based multimedia communication systems like SIP [RFC3261] and
H.323 [H.323] have the concept of a "call identifier" that is
globally unique. The identifier is intended to represent an end-to-
end communication session from the originating device to the
terminating device. Such an identifier is useful for
troubleshooting, session tracking, and so forth.
For several reasons, however, the current call identifiers defined in
SIP and H.323 are not suitable for end-to-end session identification.
A fundamental issue in protocol interworking is the fact that the
syntax for the call identifier in SIP and H.323 is different. Thus,
if both protocols are used in a call, it is impossible to exchange
the call identifier end-to-end.
Another reason why the current call identifiers are not suitable to
identify a session end-to-end is that, in real-world deployments,
devices like session border controllers often change the session
signaling as it passes through the device, including the value of the
call identifier. While this is deliberate and useful, it makes it
very difficult to track a session end-to-end.
This draft presents a new identifier, referred to as the Session
Identifier, and associated syntax intended to overcome the issues
that exist with the currently defined call identifiers used in SIP.
The procedures specified in this document attempt to comply with the
requirements specified in [RFC7206]. This procedures also specify
capabilities not mentioned in [RFC7206], shown in call flows in
section 9. Additionally, the specification attempts to account for a
previous, proprietary version of a SIP Session Identifier header
[RFC7329], specifying a backwards compatibility approach in section
10.
2. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]
when they appear in ALL CAPS. These words may also appear in this
document in lower case as plain English words, absent their normative
meanings.
The term "Session Identifier" refers to the value of the identifier,
whereas "Session-ID" refers to the header field used to convey the
identifier.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
3. Session Identifier Requirements and Use Cases
Requirements and use cases for the end-to-end Session Identifier,
along with a definition of "session identifier" and "communication
session", can be found in [RFC7206].
As mentioned in section 6.1 of RFC 7206, the ITU-T undertook a
parallel effort to define compatible procedures for an H.323 Session
Identifier. They are documented in [H.460.27].
4. Constructing and Conveying the Session Identifier
4.1. Constructing the Session Identifier
The Session Identifier comprises two UUIDs [RFC4122], with each UUID
representing one of the endpoints participating in the session.
The version number in the UUID indicates the manner in which the UUID
is generated, such as using random values or using the MAC address of
the endpoint. To satisfy the requirement that no user or device
information be conveyed, endpoints SHOULD generate version 4 (random)
or version 5 (SHA-1) UUIDs to address relevant privacy concerns.
When generating a version 5 UUID, endpoints or intermediaries MUST
utilize the procedures defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC4122] and employ
the following "name space ID":
uuid_t NameSpace_SessionID = {
/* a58587da-c93d-11e2-ae90-f4ea67801e29 */
0xa58587da,
0xc93d,
0x11e2,
0xae, 0x90, 0xf4, 0xea, 0x67, 0x80, 0x1e, 0x29
}
Further, the "name" to utilize for version 5 UUIDs is the
concatenation of the Call-ID header value and the "tag" parameter
that appears on the "From" or "To" line associated with the device
for which the UUID is created. Once an endpoint generates a UUID for
a session, the UUID never changes, even if values originally used as
input into its construction change over time.
Stateless intermediaries that insert a Session-ID header into a SIP
message on behalf of a sending User Agent MUST utilize version 5
UUIDs to ensure that UUIDs for the communication session are
consistently generated. If a stateless intermediary does not know
the tag value for the endpoint (e.g., a new INVITE without a To: tag
value or an older SIP [RFC2543] implementation that did not include a
tag parameter), the intermediary MUST NOT attempt to generate a UUID
for that endpoint. Note that if an intermediary is stateless and the
endpoint on one end of the call is replaced with another endpoint due
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
to some service interaction, the values used to create the UUID
should change and, if so, the intermediary will compute a different
UUID.
4.2. Conveying the Session Identifier
The SIP user agent (UA) initially transmitting the SIP request, i.e.,
a User Agent Client (UAC), will create a UUID and transmit that to
the ultimate destination UA. Likewise, the responding UA, i.e., a
User Agent Server (UAS), will create a UUID and transmit that to the
first UA. These two distinct UUIDs form what is referred to as the
Session Identifier and is represented in this document in set
notation of the form {A,B}, where A is UUID value from the UA
transmitting a message and B is the UUID value of the intended
recipient of the message, i.e., not an intermediary server along the
signaling path. The Session Identifier {A,B} is equal to the Session
Identifier {B,A}.
In the case where only one UUID is known, such as when a UA first
initiates a SIP request, the Session Identifier would be {A,N}, where
"A" represents the UUID value transmitted by the UA and "N" is what
is referred to as the null UUID (see section 5).
Since SIP sessions are subject to any number of service interactions,
SIP INVITE messages might be forked as sessions are established, and
since conferences might be established or expanded with endpoints
calling in or the conference focus calling out, the construction of
the Session Identifier as a set of UUIDs is important.
To understand this better, consider that a UA participating in a
communication session might be replaced with another, such as the
case where two "legs" of a call are joined together by a PBX.
Suppose that UA A and UA B both call UA C. Further suppose that UA C
uses a local PBX function to join the call between itself and UA A
with the call between itself and UA B, resulting in a single
remaining call between UA A and UA B. This merged call can be
identified using two UUID values assigned by each entity in the
communication session, namely {A,B} in this example.
In the case of forking, UA A might send an INVITE that gets forked to
five different UAs, as an example. A means of identifying each of
these separate communication sessions is needed and allowing the set
of {A, B1}, {A, B2}, {A, B3}, {A, B4}, and {A, B5} makes this
possible.
For conferencing scenarios, it is also useful to have a two-part
Session Identifier where the conference focus specifies the same UUID
for each conference participant. This will allow for correlation
among the participants in a single conference. For example, in a
conference with three participants, the Session Identifiers might be
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
{A,M}, {B,M}, and {C,M}, where "M" is assigned by the conference
focus.
How a device acting on Session Identifiers stores, processes, or
utilizes the Session Identifier is outside the scope of this
document.
5. The Session-ID Header Field
The syntax specified here replaces the Session-ID header field syntax
defined in RFC 7329 [RFC7329].
Each session initiated or accepted MUST have a unique local UA-
generated UUID. This value MUST remain unchanged throughout the
duration of the session.
A SIP UA or proxy that generates a Session-ID header on behalf of a
UA MUST convey its Session Identifier UUID in all transmitted
messages by including the Session-ID header. The Session-ID header
has the following ABNF [RFC5234] syntax:
session-id = "Session-ID" HCOLON local-uuid
*(SEMI sess-id-param)
local-uuid = sess-uuid / null
remote-uuid = sess-uuid / null
sess-uuid = 32(DIGIT / %x61-66) ;32 chars of [0-9a-f]
sess-id-param = remote-param / generic-param
remote-param = "remote" EQUAL remote-uuid
null = 32("0")
The productions "SEMI", "EQUAL", and "generic-param" are defined in
[RFC3261]. The production DIGIT is defined in [RFC5234].
The Session-ID header MUST NOT have more than one "remote" parameter.
In the case where an entity compliant with this specification is
interworking with an entity that implemented [RFC7329], the "remote"
parameter might be absent, but otherwise the remote parameter MUST be
present. The details under which those conditions apply are described
in Section 10. Except for backwards compatibility with [RFC7329], the
"remote" parameter MUST be present.
A special null UUID value composed of 32 zeros is required in certain
situations. A null UUID is expected as the "remote-uuid" of every
initial standard SIP request since the initiating endpoint would not
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
initially know the UUID value of the remote endpoint. This null value
will get replaced by the ultimate destination UAS when that UA
generates a UUID in response. One caveat is explained in Section 10
for a possible backwards compatibility case. A null UUID value is
also returned by some intermediary devices that send provisional
replies as a "local-uuid", as described in Section 7.
The "local-uuid" in the Session-ID header represents the UUID value
of the UA transmitting the message. If the UA transmitting the
message previously received a UUID value from its peer endpoint, it
MUST include that UUID as the "remote" parameter in each message it
transmits. For example, a Session-ID header might appear like this:
Session-ID: ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86;
remote=47755a9de7794ba387653f2099600ef2
The UUID values are presented as strings of lower-case hexadecimal
characters, with the most significant octet of the UUID appearing
first.
6. Endpoint Behavior
To comply with this specification, non-intermediary SIP UAs MUST
include a Session-ID header-value in all SIP messages transmitted as
a part of a communication session. The UUID of the transmitter of
the message MUST appear in the "local-uuid" portion of the Session-ID
header-value. The UUID of the peer device, if known, MUST appear as
the "remote" parameter following the transmitter's UUID. The null
UUID value MUST be used the peer device's UUID is not known.
Once a UA allocates a UUID value for a communication session, the UA
MUST NOT change that UUID value for the duration of the session,
including when
- communication attempts are retried due to receipt of 4xx
messages or request timeouts;
- the session is redirected in response to a 3xx message; or
- a session is transferred via a REFER message [RFC3515]; or
- a SIP dialog is replaced via an INVITE with Replaces [RFC3891].
A non-intermediary UA that receives a Session-ID header MUST take
note of the "local-uuid" value that it receives and assume that is
the UUID of the peer endpoint within that communications session.
UAs MUST include this received UUID value as the "remote" parameter
when transmitting subsequent messages, making sure not to change this
UUID value in the process of moving the value internally from the
"local-uuid" field to the "remote-uuid" field.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
It should be noted that messages received by a UA might contain a
"local-uuid" value that does not match what the UA expected the far
end UA's UUID to be. It is also possible for the UA to receive a
"remote-uuid" value that does not match the UA's assigned UUID for
the session. Either might happen as a result of service interactions
by intermediaries and MUST NOT negatively affect the communication
session. However, the UA may log this event for the purposes of
troubleshooting.
A UA MUST assume that the UUID value of the peer UA MAY change at any
time due to service interactions. If the UUID value of the peer UA
changes, the UA MUST accept the new UUID as the peer's UUID and
include this new UUID as the "remote" parameter in any subsequent
messages.
It is also important to note that if an intermediary in the network
forks a session, the initiating UA may receive multiple responses
back from different endpoints, each of which contains a different
UUID ("local-uuid") value. UAs MUST take care to ensure that the
correct UUID value is returned in the "remote" parameter when
interacting with each endpoint.
A Multipoint Control Unit (MCU) is a special type of conferencing
endpoint and is discussed in Section 8.
7. Processing by Intermediaries
The Call-ID often reveals personal, device, domain or other sensitive
information associated with a user, which is why intermediaries, such
as proxies and session border controllers, sometimes alter the Call-
ID. In order to ensure the integrity of the end-to-end Session
Identifier, it is constructed in a way which does not reveal such
information, removing the need for intermediaries to alter it. As
such, intermediaries MUST NOT alter the UUID values found in the
Session-ID header, except as described in this section.
Intermediary devices that transfer a call, such as by joining
together two different "call legs", MUST properly construct a
Session-ID header that contains the correct UUID values and correct
placement of those values. As described above, the recipient of any
message initiated by the intermediary will assume that the first UUID
value belongs to the peer endpoint.
If an intermediary receives a SIP message without a Session-ID header
field or valid header value, the intermediary MAY assign a "local-
uuid" value to represent the sending endpoint and insert that value
into all signaling messages on behalf of the sending endpoint for
that dialog. If the intermediary is aware of a "remote-uuid" value
that identifies the receiving UA, it MUST insert that value if also
inserting the "local-uuid" value.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Whenever there is a UA that does not implement this specification
communicating through a B2BUA, the B2BUA MAY become dialog stateful
and insert a UUID value into the Session-ID header on behalf of the
UA according to the rules stated in Section 6.
When an intermediary transmits a provisional response, the "remote-
uuid" field will contain the UUID value of the UA that sent the
message that prompted the transmission of the provisional response.
When the UUID of the destination UA for the message that prompted the
transmission of the provisional response is known, the intermediary
MUST insert the UUID of the destination UA in the "local-uuid" field
of the provisional response. Otherwise, the intermediary MAY set the
"local-uuid" field of the provisional response to a locally generated
UUID value or the null UUID value.
A CANCEL request sent by an intermediary that has not received a UUID
from the destination UA MUST construct a Session-ID header value
exactly like the INVITE to that UA, with the known "local-uuid" value
for the initiating UA and the null UUID as the "remote-uuid" value
for the destination UA.
Devices that initiate communication sessions following the procedures
for third party call control MUST fabricate a UUID value that will be
utilized only temporarily. Once the responding endpoint provides a
UUID value in a response message, the temporary value MUST be
discarded and replaced with the endpoint-provided UUID value. Refer
to the third-party call control example for an illustration.
If a SIP intermediary initiates a dialog between two UAs in a 3PCC
scenario, the SIP request in the initial INVITE will have a non-null
"local-uuid" value; call this temporary UUID X. The request will
still have a null "remote-uuid" value; call this value N. The SIP
server MUST be transaction stateful. The UUID pair in the INVITE
will be {X,N}. A non-redirected or rejected response will have a
UUID pair {A,X}. This transaction stateful, dialog initiating SIP
server MUST replace its own UUID, i.e., X, with a null UUID (i.e.,
{A,N}) as expected by other UAS (see Section 9.7 for an example).
8. Associating Endpoints in a Multipoint Conference
Multipoint Control Units (MCUs) group two or more sessions into a
single multipoint conference. MCUs, including cascaded MCUs, MUST
utilize the same UUID value ("local-uuid" portion of the Session-ID
header-value) with all participants in the conference. In so doing,
each individual session in the conference will have a unique Session
Identifier (since each endpoint will create a unique UUID of its
own), but will also have one UUID in common with all other
participants in the conference.
When creating a cascaded conferencing, an MCU MUST convey the UUID
value to utilize for a conference via the "local-uuid" portion of the
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Session-ID header-value in an INVITE to a second MCU when using SIP
to establish the cascaded conference. A conference bridge, or MCU,
needs a way to identify itself when contacting another MCU. RFC 4579
[RFC4579] defines the "isfocus" Contact: header parameter just for
this purpose. The initial MCU MUST include the UUID of that
particular conference in the "local-uuid" of an INVITE to the other
MCU(s) participating in that conference. Also included in this
INVITE is an "isfocus" Contact header parameter identifying that this
INVITE is coming from an MCU and that this UUID is to be given out in
all responses from UAs into those MCUs participating in this same
conference. This ensures a single UUID is common across all
participating MCUs of the same conference, but is unique between
different conferences.
Intermediary devices or network diagnostics equipment might assume
that when they see two or more sessions with different Session
Identifiers, but with one UUID in common, that the sessions are part
of the same conference. However, the assumption that two sessions
having one common UUID being part of the same conference is not
always correct. In a SIP forking scenario, for example, there might
also be what appears to be multiple sessions with a shared UUID
value; this is intended. The desire is to allow for the association
of related sessions, regardless of whether a session is forked or
part of a conference.
9. Various Call Flow Operations
Seeing something frequently makes understanding easier. With that in
mind, we include several call flow examples with the initial UUID and
the complete Session Identifier indicated per message, as well as
when the Session Identifier changes according to the rules within
this document during certain operations/functions.
This section is for illustrative purposes only and is non-normative.
In the following flows, RTP refers to the Real-time Transport
Protocol [RFC3550].
In the examples in this section, "N" represents a null UUID and other
letters represents the unique UUID values corresponding to endpoints
or MCUs.
9.1. Basic Call with 2 UUIDs
Session-ID
--- Alice B2BUA Bob Carol
{A,N} |---INVITE F1--->| |
{A,N} | |---INVITE F2--->|
{B,A} | |<---200 OK F3---|
{B,A} |<---200 OK F4---| |
{A,B} |-----ACK F5---->| |
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
{A,B} | |-----ACK F6---->|
|<==============RTP==============>|
Figure 1 - Session-ID Creation when Alice calls Bob
General operation of this example:
o UA-Alice populates the "local-uuid" portion of the Session-ID
header-value.
o UA-Alice sends its UUID in the SIP INVITE, and populates the
"remote" parameter with a null value (32 zeros).
o B2BUA receives an INVITE with both a "local-uuid" portion of
the Session-ID header-value from UA-Alice as well as the null
"remote-uuid" value, and transmits the INVITE towards UA-Bob
with an unchanged Session-ID header-value.
o UA-Bob receives Session-ID and generates its "local-uuid"
portion of the Session-ID header-value UUID to construct the
whole/complete Session-ID header-value, at the same time
transferring Alice's UUID unchanged to the "remote-uuid"
portion of the Session-ID header-value in the 200 OK SIP
response.
o B2BUA receives the 200 OK response with a complete Session-ID
header-value from UA-Bob, and transmits 200 OK towards UA-Alice
with an unchanged Session-ID header-value.
o UA-Alice, upon reception of the 200 OK from the B2BUA,
transmits the ACK towards the B2BUA. The construction of the
Session-ID header-value in this ACK is that of Alice's UUID is
the "local-uuid", and Bob's UUID populates the "remote-uuid"
portion of the header-value.
o B2BUA receives the ACK with a complete Session-ID header-value
from UA-Alice, and transmits ACK towards UA-Bob with an
unchanged Session-ID header-value.
Below is a complete SIP message exchange illustrating proper use of
the Session-ID header. For the sake of brevity, non-essential headers
and message bodies are omitted.
F1 INVITE Alice -> B2BUA
INVITE sip:bob@biloxi.com/TCP SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
;branch=z9hG4bK776asdhds
Max-Forwards: 70
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
;remote=00000000000000000000000000000000
CSeq: 314159 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.example.com>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 142
(Alice's SDP not shown)
F2 INVITE B2BUA -> Bob
INVITE sip:bob@192.168.10.20/TCP SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP server10.biloxi.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bK4b43c2ff8.1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bK776asdhds ;received=10.1.3.33
Max-Forwards: 69
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
;remote=00000000000000000000000000000000
CSeq: 314159 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@pc33.atlanta.example.com>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 142
(Alice's SDP not shown)
F3 200 OK Bob -> B2BUA
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP server10.biloxi.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bK4b43c2ff8.1 ;received=192.168.10.1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8 ;received=10.1.3.33
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=a6c85cf
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: 47755a9de7794ba387653f2099600ef2
;remote=ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
CSeq: 314159 INVITE
Contact: <sip:bob@192.168.10.20>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 131
(Bob's SDP not shown)
F4 200 OK B2BUA -> Alice
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8 ;received=10.1.3.33
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=a6c85cf
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: 47755a9de7794ba387653f2099600ef2
;remote=ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
CSeq: 314159 INVITE
Contact: <sip:bob@192.168.10.20>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 131
(Bob's SDP not shown)
F5 ACK Alice -> B2BUA
ACK sip:bob@10.1.3.33 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8
Max-Forwards: 70
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=a6c85cf
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
;remote=47755a9de7794ba387653f2099600ef2
CSeq: 314159 ACK
Content-Length: 0
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
F6 ACK B2BUA -> Bob
ACK sip:bob@192.168.10.20 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP pc33.atlanta.example.com
;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8
Max-Forwards: 70
To: Bob <sip:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=a6c85cf
From: Alice <sip:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1928301774
Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710@pc33.atlanta.example.com
Session-ID: ab30317f1a784dc48ff824d0d3715d86
;remote=47755a9de7794ba387653f2099600ef2
CSeq: 314159 ACK
Content-Length: 0
The remaining examples in this Section do not display the complete
SIP message exchange. Instead, they simply use the set notation
described in Section 4.2 to show the Session Identifier exchange
throughout the particular call flow being illustrated.
9.2. Basic Call Transfer using REFER
From the example built within Section 9.1, we proceed to this 'Basic
Call Transfer using REFER' example.
Session-ID
--- Alice B2BUA Bob Carol
| | | |
|<==============RTP==============>| |
{B,A} | |<---reINVITE----| |
{B,A} |<---reINVITE----| (puts Alice on Hold) |
{A,B} |-----200 OK---->| | |
{A,B} | |-----200 OK---->| |
{B,A} | |<-----ACK-------| |
{B,A} |<-----ACK-------| | |
| | | |
{B,A} | |<----REFER------| |
{B,A} |<----REFER------| | |
{A,B} |-----200 OK---->| | |
{A,B} | |-----200 OK---->| |
{A,B} |-----NOTIFY---->| | |
{A,B} | |-----NOTIFY---->| |
{B,A} | |<----200 OK-----| |
{B,A} |<----200 OK-----| | |
| | | |
{A,N} |-----INVITE---->| |
{A,N} | |-----INVITE-------------------->|
{C,A} | |<----200 OK---------------------|
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
{C,A} |<----200 OK-----| |
{A,C} |------ACK------>| |
{A,C} | |------ACK---------------------->|
| | | |
|<======================RTP======================>|
| | | |
{A,B} |-----NOTIFY---->| | |
{A,B} | |-----NOTIFY---->| |
{B,A} | |<----200 OK-----| |
{B,A} |<----200 OK-----| | |
{B,A} | |<-----BYE-------| |
{B,A} |<-----BYE-------| | |
{A,B} |-----200 OK---->| | |
{A,B} | |-----200 OK---->| |
| | | |
Figure 2 - Call Transfer using REFER
General operation of this example:
Starting from the existing Alice/Bob call described in Figure 1 of
this document, which established an existing Session-ID header-
value...
o UA-Bob requests Alice to call Carol, using a REFER transaction,
as described in [RFC3515]. UA-Alice is initially put on hold,
then told in the REFER who to contact with a new INVITE, in
this case UA-Carol. This Alice-to-Carol dialog will have a new
Call-ID, therefore it requires a new Session-ID header-value.
The wrinkle here is we can, and will, use Alice's UUID from her
existing dialog with Bob in the new INVITE to Carol.
o UA-Alice retains her UUID from the Alice-to-Bob call {A} when
requesting a call with UA-Carol. This is placed in the "local-
uuid" portion of the Session-ID header-value, at the same time
inserting a null "remote-uuid" value (because Carol's UA has
not yet received the UUID value). This same UUID traverses the
B2BUA unchanged.
o UA-Carol receives the INVITE with a Session Identifier UUID
{A,N}, replaces the A UUID value into the "remote-uuid" portion
of the Session-ID header-value and creates its own UUID {C} and
places this value in the "local-uuid" portion of the Session-ID
header-value - thereby removing the N (null) value altogether.
This combination forms a full Session Identifier {C,A} in the
200 OK to the INVITE. This Session-ID header-value traverses
the B2BUA unchanged towards UA-Alice.
o UA-Alice receives the 200 OK with the Session Identifier {C,A}
and responds to UA-Carol with an ACK (just as in Figure 1 -
switches places of the two UUID fields), and generates a NOTIFY
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
to Bob with a Session Identifier {A,B} indicating the call
transfer was successful.
o It does not matter which UA terminates the Alice-to-Bob call;
Figure 2 shows UA-Bob doing this transaction.
9.3. Basic Call Transfer using reINVITE
From the example built within Section 9.1, we proceed to this 'Basic
Call Transfer using reINVITE' example.
Alice is talking to Bob. Bob pushes a button on his phone to transfer
Alice to Carol via the B2BUA (using reINVITE).
Session-ID
--- Alice B2BUA Bob Carol
| | | |
|<==============RTP==============>| |
| | | |
| | <--- (non-standard signaling) |
{A,B} | |---reINVITE---->| |
{B,A} | |<-----200 OK----| |
{B,A} | |-----ACK------->| |
| | | |
{A,N} | |-----INVITE-------------------->|
{C,A} | |<----200 OK---------------------|
{A,C} | |------ACK---------------------->|
| | | |
|<======================RTP======================>|
| | | |
{A,B} | |------BYE------>| |
{B,A} | |<----200 OK-----| |
| | | |
Figure 3 - Call transfer using reINVITE
General operation of this example:
o We assume the call between Alice and Bob from Section 9.1 is
operational with Session Identifier {A,B}.
o Bob uses non-standard signaling to the B2BUA to initiate a call
transfer from Alice to Carol. This could also be initiated via
a REFER message from Bob, but the signaling that follows might
still be similar to the above flow. In either case, Alice is
completely unaware of the call transfer.
o The B2BUA sends a new INVITE with Alice's UUID {"local-uuid" =
"A"} to Carol.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
o Carol receives the INVITE and accepts the request and adds her
UUID {C} to the Session Identifier for this session {"local-
uuid" = "C", "remote-uuid" = "A"}.
o The B2BUA then terminates the call to Bob with a BYE using the
Session Identifier {"local-uuid" = "A", "remote-uuid" = "B"}.
9.4. Single Focus Conferencing
Multiple users call into a conference server (say, an MCU) to attend
one of many conferences hosted on or managed by that server. Each
user has to identify which conference they want to join, but this
information is not necessarily in the SIP messaging. It might be
done by having a dedicated address for the conference or via an IVR,
as assumed in this example and depicted with the use of M1, M2, and
M3. Each user in this example goes through a two-step process of
signaling to gain entry onto their conference call, which the
conference focus identifies as M'.
Session-ID Conference
--- Alice Focus Bob Carol
| | | |
| | | |
{A,N} |----INVITE----->| | |
{M1,A} |<---200 OK------| | |
{A,M1} |-----ACK------->| | |
|<====RTP=======>| | |
{M',A} |<---reINVITE----| (to change the | |
{A,M'} |-----200 OK---->| UUID to M') | |
{M',A} |<-----ACK-------| | |
| | | |
| | | |
{B,N} | |<----INVITE-----| |
{M2,B} | |-----200 OK---->| |
{B,M2} | |<-----ACK-------| |
| |<=====RTP======>| |
{M',B} | (to change the |----reINVITE--->| |
{B,M'} | UUID to M') |<----200 OK-----| |
{M',B} | |------ACK------>| |
| | | |
| | | |
{C,N} | |<--------------------INVITE-----|
{M3,C} | |---------------------200 OK---->|
{C,M3} | |<---------------------ACK-------|
| |<=====================RTP======>|
{M',C} | (to change the |--------------------reINVITE--->|
{C,M'} | UUID to M') |<--------------------200 OK-----|
{M',C} | |----------------------ACK------>|
Figure 4 - Single Focus Conference Bridge
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
General operation of this example:
Alice calls into a conference server to attend a certain conference.
This is a two-step operation since Alice cannot include the
conference ID at this time and/or any passcode in the INVITE request.
The first step is Alice's UA calling another UA to participate in a
session. This will appear to be similar as the call-flow in Figure 1
(in section 9.1). What is unique about this call is the second step:
the conference server sends a reINVITE request with its second UUID,
but maintaining the UUID Alice sent in the first INVITE. This
subsequent UUID from the conference server will be the same for each
UA that calls into this conference server participating in this same
conference bridge/call, which is generated once Alice typically
authenticates and identifies which bridge she wants to participate
on.
o Alice sends an INVITE to the conference server with her UUID
{A} and a "remote-uuid" = N.
o The conference server responds with a 200 OK response which
replaces the N UUID with a temporary UUID ("M1") as the "local-
uuid" and a "remote-uuid" = "A".
NOTE: this 'temporary' UUID is a real UUID; it is only temporary
to the conference server because it knows that it is going to
generate another UUID to replace the one just send in the 200 OK.
o Once Alice, the user, gains access to the IVR for this
conference server, she enters a specific conference ID and
whatever passcode (if needed) to enter a specific conference
call.
o Once the conference server is satisfied Alice has identified
which conference she wants to attend (including any passcode
verification), the conference server reINVITEs Alice to the
specific conference and includes the Session-ID header-value of
"local-uuid" = "M'" (and "remote-uuid" = "A") for that
conference. All valid participants in the same conference will
receive this same UUID for identification purposes and to
better enable monitoring, and tracking functions.
o Bob goes through this two-step process of an INVITE
transaction, followed by a reINVITE transaction to get this
same UUID ("M'") for that conference.
o In this example, Carol (and each additional user) goes through
the same procedures and steps as Alice and Bob to get on this
same conference.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
9.5. Single Focus Conferencing using WebEx
Alice, Bob and Carol call into same WebEx conference.
Session-ID Conference
--- Alice Focus Bob Carol
| | | |
|<** HTTPS *****>| | |
| Transaction | | |
| | | |
{M,N} |<----INVITE-----| | |
{A,M} |-----200 OK---->| | |
{M,A} |<-----ACK-------| | |
|<=====RTP======>| | |
| | | |
| |<** HTTPS *****>| |
| | Transaction | |
| | | |
{M,N} | |-----INVITE---->| |
{B,M} | |<----200 OK-----| |
{M,B} | |------ACK------>| |
| |<=====RTP======>| |
| | | |
| |<****************** HTTPS *****>|
| | Transaction |
| | | |
{M,N} | |--------------------INVITE----->|
{C,M} | |<-------------------200 OK------|
{M,C} | |---------------------ACK------->|
| |<====================RTP=======>|
Figure 5 - Single Focus WebEx Conference
General operation of this example:
o Alice communicates with WebEx server with desire to join a
certain meeting, by meeting number; also includes UA-Alice's
contact information (phone number, URI and/or IP address, etc.)
for each device she wants for this conference call. For
example, the audio and video play-out devices could be separate
units.
o Conference Focus server sends INVITE (Session-ID header-value
"local-uuid" = M and a remote UUID of N, where M equals the
"local-uuid" for each participant on this conference bridge) to
UA-Alice to start session with that server for this A/V
conference call.
o Upon receiving the INVITE request from the conference focus
server, Alice responds with a 200 OK. Her UA moves the "local-
uuid" unchanged into the "remote-uuid" field, and generates her
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
own UUID and places that into the "local-uuid" field to
complete the Session-ID construction.
o Bob and Carol perform same function to join this same A/V
conference call as Alice.
9.6. Cascading Conference Bridges
9.6.1. Establishing a Cascaded Conference
To expand conferencing capabilities requires cascading conference
bridges. A conference bridge, or MCU, needs a way to identify itself
when contacting another MCU. RFC 4579 [RFC4579] defines the 'isfocus'
Contact: header parameter just for this purpose.
Session-ID
--- MCU-1 MCU-2 MCU-3 MCU-4
| | | |
{M',N} |----INVITE----->| | |
{J,M'} |<---200 OK------| | |
{M',J} |-----ACK------->| | |
Figure 6 - MCUs Communicating Session Identifier UUID for Bridge
Regardless of which MCU (1 or 2) a UA contacts for this conference,
once the above exchange has been received and acknowledged, the UA
will get the same {M',N} UUID pair from the MCU for the complete
Session Identifier.
A more complex form would be a series of MCUs all being informed of
the same UUID to use for a specific conference. This series of MCUs
can either be informed
o All by one MCU (that initially generates the UUID for the
conference).
o The MCU that generates the UUID informs one or several MCUs of
this common UUID, and they inform downstream MCUs of this
common UUID that each will be using for this one conference.
Session-ID
--- MCU-1 MCU-2 MCU-3 MCU-4
| | | |
{M',N} |----INVITE----->| | |
{J,M'} |<---200 OK------| | |
{M',J} |-----ACK------->| | |
| | | |
{M',N} |---------------------INVITE----->| |
{K,M'} |<--------------------200 OK------| |
{M',K} |----------------------ACK------->| |
| | | |
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
{M',N} |-------------------------------------INVITE----->|
{L,M'} |<------------------------------------200 OK------|
{M',L} |--------------------------------------ACK------->|
Figure 7 - MCU Communicating Session Identifier UUID to More than
One MCU
General operation of this example:
o The MCU generating the Session Identifier UUID communicates
this in a separate INVITE, having a Contact header with the
'isfocus' header parameter. This will identify the MCU as what
RFC 4579 calls a conference-aware SIP entity.
o An MCU that receives this {M',N} UUID pair in an inter-MCU
transaction can communicate the M' UUID in a manner in which it
was received to construct a hierarchical cascade (though this
time this second MCU would be the UAC MCU).
o Once the conference is terminated, the cascaded MCUs will
receive a BYE message to terminate the cascade.
9.6.2. Calling into Cascaded Conference Bridges
Here is an example of how a UA, say Robert, calls into a cascaded
conference focus. Because MCU-1 has already contacted MCU-3, the MCU
where Robert is going to join the conference, MCU-3 already has the
Session-ID (M') for this particular conference call.
Session-ID
--- MCU-1 MCU-2 MCU-3 Robert
| | | |
{M',N} |----INVITE----->| | |
{J,M'} |<---200 OK------| | |
{M',J} |-----ACK------->| | |
| | | |
{M',N} |---------------------INVITE----->| |
{K,M'} |<--------------------200 OK------| |
{M',K} |----------------------ACK------->| |
| | | |
{R,N} | | |<---INVITE-----|
(M',R} | | |----200 OK---->|
{R,M'} | | |<----ACK-------|
Figure 8 - A UA Calling into a Cascaded MCU UUID
General operation of this example:
o The UA, Robert in this case, INVITEs the MCU to join a
particular conference call. Robert's UA does not know anything
about whether this is the main MCU of the conference call, or a
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
cascaded MCU. Robert likely does not know MCUs can be cascaded,
he just wants to join a particular call. Like as with any
standard implementation, he includes a null "remote-uuid".
o The cascaded MCU, upon receiving this INVITE from Robert,
replaces the null UUID with the UUID value communicated from
MCU-1 for this conference call as the "local-uuid" in the SIP
response. Thus, moving Robert's UUID "R" to the "remote-uuid"
value.
o The ACK has the Session-ID {R,M'}, completing the 3-way
handshake for this call establishment. Robert has now joined
the conference call originated from MCU-1.
o Once the conference is terminated, the cascaded MCUs will
receive a BYE message to terminate the cascade.
9.7. Basic 3PCC for two UAs
External entity sets up call to both Alice and Bob for them to talk
to each other.
Session-ID
--- Alice B2BUA Bob Carol
| | |
{X,N} |<----INVITE-----| |
{A,X} |-----200 OK---->| |
{A,N} | |----INVITE----->|
{B,A} | |<---200 OK------|
{B,A} |<-----ACK-------| |
{A,B} | |------ACK------>|
|<==============RTP==============>|
Figure 9 - 3PCC initiated call between Alice and Bob
General operation of this example:
o Some out of band procedure directs a B2BUA (or other SIP
server) to have Alice and Bob talk to each other. In this case,
the SIP server MUST be transaction stateful, if not dialog
stateful.
o The SIP server INVITEs Alice to a session and uses a temporary
UUID {X} and a null UUID pairing.
o Alice receives and accepts this call set-up and replaces the
null UUID with her UUID {A} in the Session Identifier, now
{A,X}.
o The transaction stateful SIP server receives Alice's UUID {A}
in the local UUID portion and keeps it there, and discards its
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
own UUID {X}, replacing this with a null UUID value in the
INVITE to Bob as if this came from Alice originally.
o Bob receives and accepts this INVITE and adds his own UUID {B}
to the Session Identifier, now {B,A} for the response.
o And the session is established.
9.8. Handling in 100 Trying SIP Response and CANCEL Request
The following two subsections show examples of the Session Identifier
for a 100 Trying response and a CANCEL request in a single call-flow.
9.8.1. Handling in a 100 Trying SIP Response
The following 100 Trying response is taken from an existing RFC, from
[RFC5359] Section 2.9 ("Call Forwarding - No Answer").
Session-ID Alice SIP Server Bob-1 Bob-2
| | | |
{A,N} |----INVITE----->| | |
{A,N} | |---INVITE---->| |
{N,A} |<--100 Trying---| | |
{B1,A} | |<-180 Ringing-| |
{B1,A} |<--180 Ringing--| | |
| | | |
| *Request Timeout* |
| | | |
{A,B1} | |---CANCEL---->| |
{B1,A} | |<--200 OK-----| |
{B1,A} | |<---487-------| |
{A,B1} | |---- ACK ---->| |
| | | |
{N,A} |<-181 Call Fwd--| | |
| | | |
{A,N} | |------------------INVITE------>|
{B2,A} | |<----------------180 Ringing---|
{B2,A} |<-180 Ringing---| | |
{B2,A} | |<-----------------200 OK ------|
{B2,A} |<--200 OK-------| | |
{A,B2} |----ACK-------->| | |
{A,B2} | |------------------ACK--------->|
| | | |
|<=========== Both way RTP Established =========>|
| | | |
{A,B2} |----BYE-------->| | |
{A,B2} | |--------------------BYE------->|
{B2,A} | |<------------------200 OK------|
{B2,A} |<--200 OK-------| | |
| | | |
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Figure 10 - Session Identifier in the 100 Trying and CANCEL Messaging
Below is the explanatory text from RFC 5359 Section 2.9 detailing
what the desired behavior is in the above call flow (i.e., what the
call-flow is attempting to achieve).
"Bob wants calls to B1 forwarded to B2 if B1 is not answered
(information is known to the SIP server). Alice calls B1 and no
one answers. The SIP server then places the call to B2."
General operation of this example:
o Alice generates an INVITE request because she wants to invite
Bob to join her session. She creates a UUID as described in
section 9.1, and places that value in the "local-uuid" field of
the Session-ID header-value. Alice also generates a "remote-
uuid" of null and sends this along with the "local-uuid".
o The SIP server (imagine this is a B2BUA), upon receiving
Alice's INVITE, generates the optional provisional response 100
Trying. Since the SIP server has no knowledge Bob's UUID for
his part of the Session Identifier value, it cannot include his
"local-uuid". Rather, any 100 Trying response includes Alice's
UUID in the "remote-uuid" portion of the Session-ID header-
value with a null "local-uuid" value in the response. This is
consistent with what Alice's UA expects to receive in any SIP
response containing this UUID.
9.8.2. Handling a CANCEL SIP Request
In the same call-flow example as the 100 Trying response is a CANCEL
request. Please refer to Figure 10 for the CANCEL request example.
General operation of this example:
o In Figure 10 above, Alice generates an INVITE with her UUID
value in the Session-ID header-value.
o Bob-1 responds to this INVITE with a 180 Ringing. In that
response, he includes his UUID in the Session-ID header-value
(i.e., {B1,A}); thus completing the Session-ID header-value for
this session, even though no final response has been generated
by any of Bob's UAs.
o This means that if the SIP server were to generate a SIP
request within this session, in this case a CANCEL request, it
would have a complete Session Identifier to include in that
request. In this case, the "local-uuid" = "A", and the "remote-
uuid" = "B1".
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
o As it happens with this CANCEL, the SIP server intends to
invite another UA of Bob (i.e., B2) for Alice to communicate
with.
o In this example call-flow, taken from RFC 5359, Section 2.9, a
181 (Call is being Forwarded) response is sent to Alice. Since
the SIP server generated this SIP request, and has no knowledge
of Bob-2's UUID value, it cannot include that value in this
181. Thus, and for the exact reasons the 100 Trying including
the Session Identifier value, only Alice's UUID is included in
the remote-uuid field of the Session-ID header-value, with a
null UUID present in the "local-uuid" field.
9.9. Out-of-dialog REFER Transaction
The following call-flow was extracted from Section 6.1 of [RFC5589]
("Successful Transfer"), with the only changes being the names of the
UAs to maintain consistency within this document.
Alice is the transferee
Bob is the transferer
and Carol is the transfer-target
Session-ID Bob Alice Carol
| | |
{A,N} |<-----INVITE--------| |
{B,A} |------200 OK------->| |
{A,B} |<------ACK----------| |
| | |
{B,A} |--INVITE {hold}---->| |
{A,B} |<-200 OK------------| |
{B,A} |--- ACK ----------->| |
| | |
{B,A} |--REFER------------>|(Refer-To:Carol) |
{A,B} |<-202 Accepted------| |
| | |
{A,B} |<NOTIFY {100 Trying}| |
{B,A} |-200 OK------------>| |
| | |
{A,N} | |--INVITE------------>|
{C,A} | |<-200 OK-------------|
{A,C} | |---ACK-------------->|
| | |
{A,B} |<--NOTIFY {200 OK}--| |
{B,A} |---200 OK---------->| |
| | |
{B,A} |--BYE-------------->| |
{A,B} |<-200 OK------------| |
{C,A} | |<------------BYE-----|
{A,C} | |-------------200 OK->|
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Figure 11: Out-Of-Dialog Call Transfer
General operation of this example:
o Just as in Section 9.2, Figure 2, Alice invites Bob to a
session, and Bob eventually transfers Alice to communicate with
Carol.
o What is different about the call-flow in Figure 11 is that
Bob's REFER is not in-dialog. Even so, this is treated as part
of the same communication session and, thus, the Session
Identifier in those messages is {A,B}.
o Alice will use her existing UUID and the null UUID ({A,N}) in
the INVITE towards Carol (who generates UUID "C" for this
session), thus maintaining the common UUID within the Session
Identifier for this new Alice-to-Carol session.
10. Compatibility with a Previous Implementation
There is a much earlier and proprietary document that specifies the
use of a Session-ID header (namely, [RFC7329]) that we will herewith
attempt to achieve backwards compatibility. Neither Session-ID header
has any versioning information, so merely adding that this document
describes "version 2" is insufficient. Here are the set of rules for
compatibility between the two specifications. For the purposes of
this discussion, we will label the proprietary specification of the
Session-ID as the "old" version and this specification as the "new"
version of the Session-ID.
The previous (i.e., "old") version only has a single value as a
Session-ID, but has a generic-parameter value that can be of use.
In order to have an "old" version talk to an "old" version
implementation, nothing needs to be done as far as the IETF is
concerned.
In order to have a "new" version talk to a "new" version
implementation, both implementations need to following this document
(to the letter) and everything should be just fine.
But that is where compatibility is not ensured, given the unknowns
related to the behavior of entities implementing the pre-standard
implementation. For this "new" implementation to work with the "old"
implementation and an "old" implementation to work with "new"
implementations, there needs to be a set of rules for all "new"
implementations MUST follow.
- since no option tags or feature tags are to be used for
distinguishing versions, the presence and order of any "remote-
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
uuid" value within the Session-ID header value is to be used to
distinguish implementation versions.
- if a SIP request has a "remote-uuid" value, this comes from a
standard implementation, and not a pre-standard one.
- if a SIP request has no "remote-uuid" value, this comes from a pre-
standard implementation, and not a standard one. In this case, one
UUID is used to identify this dialog, even if the responder is a
standard implementation of this specification.
- if a SIP response has a non-null "local-uuid" that is 32 octets
long and differs from the endpoint's own UUID value, this response
comes from a standard implementation.
- if a SIP response has a non-null "local-uuid" that is not 32 octets
long, this response comes from a misbehaving implementation, and
its Session-ID header value MUST be discarded. That said, the
response might still be valid according to the rules within SIP
[RFC3261], and SHOULD be checked further.
- if a SIP response arrives that has the same value of Session-ID
UUIDs in the same order as was sent, this comes from a pre-standard
implementation, and MUST NOT be discarded for not altering the null
"remote-uuid". In this case, any new transaction within this dialog
MUST preserve the order of the two UUIDs within all Session-ID
header-values, including the ACK, until this dialog is terminated.
- if a SIP response only contains the "local-uuid" that was sent
originally, this comes from a pre-standard implementation and MUST
NOT be discarded for removing the null "remote-uuid". In this case,
all future transactions within this dialog MUST contain only the
UUID received in the first SIP response. Any new transaction
starting a new dialog from the standard Session-ID implementation
MUST include and "local-uuid" and a null "remote-uuid", even if
that new dialog is between the same two UAs.
- Standard implementations SHOULD NOT expect pre-standard
implementations to be consistent in their implementation, even
within the same dialog. For example, perhaps the first, third and
tenth responses contain a "remote-uuid", but all the others do not.
This behavior MUST be allowed by implementations of this
specification.
- All of this does not apply to other parameters that might be
defined in the future, i.e., currently unknown. They are discarded.
11. Security Considerations
When creating a UUID value, endpoints MUST ensure that there is no
user or device-identifying information contained within the UUID. In
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
particular, this means that a UUID MUST NOT be constructed using a
MAC address on the host.
The Session Identifier might be utilized for logging or
troubleshooting, but MUST NOT be used for billing purposes.
The Session Identifier could be misused to discover relationships
between two or more parties. For example, suppose that Alice calls
Bob and Bob, via his PBX, forwards or transfers the call to Carol.
Without use of the Session Identifier, an unauthorized third party
that is observing the communications between Alice and Bob might not
know that Alice is actually communicating with Carol. If Alice, Bob,
and Carol include the Session Identifier as a part of the signaling
messages, it is possible for the third party to observe that the
endpoint associated with Bob changed to some other endpoint. If the
third party also has access to signaling messages between Bob and
Carol, the third party can then discover that Alice is communicating
with Carol. This would be true even if all other information
relating to the session is changed by the PBX, including both
signaling information and media address information.
12. IANA Considerations
12.1. Registration of the "Session-ID" Header Field
The following is the registration for the 'Session-ID' header field
to the "Header Name" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters:
RFC number: RFC XXXX
Header name: 'Session-ID'
Compact form: none
Note: This document replaces the "Session-ID" header originally
registered via [RFC7329].
[RFC Editor: Please replace XXXX in this section and the next with
the this RFC number of this document.]
12.2. Registration of the "remote" Parameter
The following parameter is to be added to the "Header Field
Parameters and Parameter Values" section of the SIP parameter
registry:
+------------------+----------------+-------------------+-----------+
| Header Field | Parameter Name | Predefined Values | Reference |
+------------------+----------------+-------------------+-----------+
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
| Session-ID | remote | No | [RFCXXXX] |
+------------------+----------------+-------------------+-----------+
13. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Robert Sparks, Hadriel Kaplan,
Christer Holmberg, Paul Kyzivat, Brett Tate, Keith Drage, Mary
Barnes, Charles Eckel, Peter Dawes, Andrew Hutton, Arun Arunachalam,
Adam Gensler, Roland Jesske, and Faisal Siyavudeen for their
invaluable comments during the development of this document.
14. References
14.1. Normative References
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., et al., "SIP: Session Initiation
Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., Salz, R., "A Universally Unique
IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, July 2005.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Overell, P, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 5234, January 2008.
[RFC4579] Johnston, A., Levin, O., "Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) Call Control - Conferencing for User Agents", RFC
4579, August 2006.
[RFC3891] Mahy, R., Biggs, B., Dean, R., 'The Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) "Replaces" Header', RFC 3891, September
2004.
[RFC3515] Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer
Method", RFC 3515, April 2003.
[RFC7329] Kaplan, H., "A Session Identifier for the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 7329, August 2014.
14.2. Informative References
[H.323] Recommendation ITU-T H.323, "Packet-based multimedia
communications systems", December 2009.
[RFC3550] Schulzrinne, H., et al., "RTP: A Transport Protocol for
Real-Time Applications", RFC 3550, July 2003.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
[RFC7206] Jones, et al., "Requirements for an End-to-End Session
Identification in IP-Based Multimedia Communication
Networks", RFC 7206, May 2014.
[RFC5359] Johnston, A., et al., "Session Initiation Protocol
Service Examples", RFC 5359, October 2008.
[RFC5589] Sparks, R., Johnston, A., Petrie, D., "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) Call Control - Transfer", RFC 5359, June
2009.
[RFC2543] Handley, M., Schulzrinne, H., Schooler, E. and J.
Rosenberg, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 2543,
March 1999.
[H.460.27] Recommendation ITU-T H.460.27, "End-to-End Session
Identification", Work In Progress.
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft End-To-End Session ID September 2014
Author's Addresses
Paul E. Jones (Ed.)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
USA
Phone: +1 919 476 2048
Email: paulej@packetizer.com
IM: xmpp:paulej@packetizer.com
Chris Pearce
Cisco Systems, Inc.
2300 East President George Bush Highway
Richardson, TX 75082
USA
Phone: +1 972 813 5123
Email: chrep@cisco.com
IM: xmpp:chrep@cisco.com
James Polk (Ed.)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
3913 Treemont Circle
Colleyville, Texas
USA
Phone: +1 817 271 3552
Email: jmpolk@cisco.com
IM: xmpp:jmpolk@cisco.com
Gonzalo Salgueiro
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
USA
Phone: +1 919 392 3266
Email: gsalguei@cisco.com
IM: xmpp:gsalguei@cisco.com
Jones, et al. Expires March 24, 2015 [Page 31]