XCON WG P. Koskelainen
Internet-Draft H. Khartabil
Expires: February 10, 2005 Nokia
August 12, 2004
Requirements for Conference Policy Control Protocol
draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-reqs-04
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
RFC 3668.
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 February 10, 2005.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
The conference policy server allows clients to manipulate and
interact with the conference policy. One mechanism to manipulate the
policy is to use conference policy control protocol (CPCP). This
document gives the requirements for CPCP.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Integration with Floor Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Conference Policy Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. CPCP Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1 Conference creation, termination and joining . . . . . . . 8
6.2 Manipulating general conference attributes . . . . . . . . 9
6.3 Authentication and Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.4 Application and media manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.5 ACL manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.6 Floor control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.7 Inviting and ejecting users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.8 User Privileges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.9 General Protocol Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 17
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
1. Introduction
The conferencing framework document [3] describes the overall
architecture, terminology, and protocol components needed for multi-
party conferencing. It defines a logical function called a
conference policy server which can store and manipulate rules
associated with participation in a conference. These rules include
directives on the lifespan of the conference, who can and cannot join
the conference, definitions of roles available in the conference and
the responsibilities associated with those roles.
The conference policy is represented by a URI. There is a unique
conference policy for each conference. The conference policy URI
points to a conference policy server which can manipulate that
conference policy.
Note that CPCP is not the only mechanism to manipulate conference
policy, but other mechanisms exists as well, such as a Web interface.
This document is based on the definition and description of
conference policy and the Conference Policy Control Protocol (CPCP)
in the Conferencing framework document [3], with the functionality of
CPCP being independent of SIP. Moreover, [6] give useful background
information about conferencing and floor control.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
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.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
3. Terminology
This document uses the definitions from [3].
Additional definitions:
ACL
Access control list (ACL) defines users who can join a
conference. Users may have allow, blocked or pending status in
the list. Each conference has its own ACL.
Floor control
Floor control is a mechanism that enables applications or users
to gain safe and mutually exclusive or non-exclusive access to
the shared object or resource in a conference.
Privilege
A privilege is a right to perform a manipulation operation in a
conference. It is user permission such as the right to modify
ACL or expel users.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
4. Integration with Floor Control
Floor control is an optional feature often used by conferencing
applications. It enables applications or users to gain safe and
mutually exclusive or non-exclusive input access to a shared object
or resource. We define a floor as the temporary permission for a
conference participant to access or manipulate a specific shared
resource or group of resources.
We assume that the ability of users to create floors is governed by
the conference policy. Conference user may use floor control
protocol (see e.g. [5]) or some other mechanism to request floors.
The conference policy also defines the floor control policy (e.g.
moderator-controlled or server grants the floor randomly) and the
floor moderator, if the floor policy is moderator-controlled.
The privileged user in a conference (such as the creator) can remove
the floor at any time by modifying the conference policy (so that the
resources are no longer floor- controlled), or change the floor
chair.
The floor moderator just controls the access to the floor, according
to the floor policy, defined by the conference policy at a time when
the floor is created.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
5. Conference Policy Data Model
Conference policy data is relatively static. It is not updated
frequently as e.g. participant list is not part of the conference
policy. Users with sufficient privileges are able to manipulate
conference policy. For example, a user with sufficient privileges
may manipulate conference's access control list by adding a user into
the ACL allowed list.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
6. CPCP Requirements
This section describes requirements for the conference policy control
protocol (CPCP).
6.1 Conference creation, termination and joining
REQ-A1: It MUST be possible to create a new conference addressable by
a URI.
REQ-A2: It MUST be possible to associate policy attributes to a
conference URI.
REQ-A3: It MUST be possible to reserve a conference URI for future
use with or without associating policy attributes to it.
REQ-A4: It MUST be possible for a privileged user to read conference
policy for a given conference URI, during and before joining the
conference.
REQ-A5: It MUST be possible to delete existing conference policy.
This results in terminating the conference, deleting conference URI
and releasing all resources associated with it.
REQ-A6: It MUST be possible to anonymously participate in a
conference.
REQ-A7: It MUST NOT be possible for a user to authenticate himself as
an anonymous user.
Note: A conference focus must not accept users to authenticate
themselves with a username "anonymous" (like in Digest
authentication).
REQ-A8: It MUST be possible to assign multiple conference URIs to a
conference, one for each session signaling protocol scheme that the
conference server supports.
REQ-A9: It MUST be possible to define the time when media mixing may
start ("don't-mix-before-time") and stop ("cannot-continue-after")
operating in the conference.
REQ-A10: It MUST be possible to define the time after which users are
allowed to join the conference.
REQ-A11: It MUST be possible to define the time after which new users
are not allowed to join the conference anymore.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
REQ-A12: It MUST be possible to define the time when users or
resources on the dial-out list are invited to join the conference.
REQ-A13: It MUST be possible define whether the conference can be
extended. Note: This does not guarantee that resources are
available.
REQ-A14: It MUST be possible to indicate key participants.
REQ-A15a: It MUST be possible to define when media mixing starts
based on the latter of the mixing start time, and the time the first
participant arrives.
REQ X15b: It MUST be possible to define when media mixing starts
based on the latter of the mixing start time, and the time the first
key participant arrives.
REQ-A16a: It MUST be possible to define when media mixing stops based
on the earlier of the mixing stop time, and the time the last
participant leaves the conference.
REQ-A16b: It MUST be possible to define when media mixing stops based
on the earlier of the mixing stop time, and the time the last key
participant leaves.
REQ-A16c: It MUST be possible to define when media mixing stops based
on the time only.
REQ-A17: It MUST be possible to define that the users and resources
on the dial-out list are invited only after first key participant has
joined.
Note: This parameter, if set, overrides the time defined by REQ-A12.
6.2 Manipulating general conference attributes
REQ-B1: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete a conference
Subject.
REQ-B2: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference URI
display name.
REQ-B3: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference
creator information (as is seen e.g. in SDP o line).
REQ-B4: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference URI
link for more information (as used e.g. in SDP u line).
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
REQ-B5: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference host
contact information (as used e.g. in SDP e and p lines).
REQ-B6: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete short
conference session description (as used e.g. in SDP i line). This
can be per session or per media.
REQ-B7: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete the parameter
for max number of conference participants. This defines the maximum
number of participants present at the same time.
REQ-B8: It MUST be possible to hide conference related information
from non-privileged users.
Note: This defines the level of visibility of the basic conference
information (e.g. visible only to participants). This feature may
be needed e.g. in search operations.
REQ-B9: It MUST be possible to set, modify and delete conference
Keywords.
Note: (This may be useful e.g. for search engines).
6.3 Authentication and Security
REQ-C1: It MUST be possible to define appropriate authentication for
joining users.
6.4 Application and media manipulation
REQ-D1: It MAY be possible to define media policy within conference
policy.
REQ-D2: It MUST be possible to define the media types for the
conference.
Note: This means MIME main types, such as audio and video. The
conference server can use this information e.g when placing m lines
in SIP/SDP dial-outs.
6.5 ACL manipulation
REQ-E1: It MUST be possible to define which users are not allowed to
join the conference.
REQ-E2: It MUST be possible to define which users are not allowed to
join a conference in a single operation.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
REQ-E3: It MUST be possible to define which users are allowed to join
the conference.
REQ-E4: It MUST be possible to define which users are allowed to join
a conference in a single operation.
REQ-E5: It MUST be possible to define which users are places into
pending list, waiting for further approval e.g. from moderator.
REQ-E6: It MUST be possible to use wildcards in ACL.
REQ-E7: ACL conflicts MUST be solved in a well-defined way (e.g.
what if user appears both in blocked list and in allowed list) e.g.
by mandating the order in which ACL definitions are evaluated (e.g.
most specific expression first).
REQ-E8: Conference MUST have default policy for those users that no
matching rule is found in ACL.
REQ-E9: It MUST be possible to allow and disallow anonymous
membership in a conference.
6.6 Floor control
REQ-F1: It MUST be possible to define whether floor control is in use
or not.
REQ-F2: It MUST be possible to define the algorithm to be used in
granting the floor.
Note: Example algorithms might be e.g. moderator-controlled, FCFS,
random.
REQ-F3: It MUST be possible to define how many users can have the
floor at the same time.
REQ-F4: It MUST be possible to have one floor for one or more media
types.
REQ-F5: It MUST be possible to have multiple floors in a conference.
REQ-F6: It MUST be possible to define whether a floor is
moderator-controlled or not.
REQ-F7: If the floor is moderator-controlled, it MUST be possible to
assign and replace the floor moderator.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
6.7 Inviting and ejecting users
REQ-G1: It MUST be possible to define a dial-out list of users that
the conference focus invites.
REQ-G2: It MUST be possible to set a dial-out list in a single
operation.
REQ-G3: It MUST be possible to expel users from a currently occurring
conference.
REQ-G4: It MUST be possible to expel many users in a single
operation.
REQ-G5: It MUST be possible to define list of users who the focus
should refer to the conference (so that the referred users will dial
in the conference).
REQ-G6: It MUST be possible to set the list of referred users in a
single operation.
6.8 User Privileges
REQ-H1: It MUST be possible to give a privilege to a user.
REQ-H2: It MUST be possible to give privileges to many users in a
single operation.
REQ-H3: It MUST be possible to remove a privilege from a user.
REQ-H4: It MUST be possible to remove privileges from many users in a
single operation.
REQ-H5: It MUST be possible to define users who are allowed to
subscribe to the conference event package [4].
REQ-H6: It MUST be only be possible for a users with sufficient
privileges to manipulate conference policy.
Note: For example, the creator of the conference may manipulate
conference policy.
6.9 General Protocol Requirements
REQ-CP-1: Protocol behaviour: CPCP protocol MUST be a reliable
client-server protocol. Hence, it MUST have a positive response
indicating that the request has been received, or error response if
an error has occurred.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
REQ-CP-2: Manipulations of the policy collection MUST exhibit the
ACID property; that is, they MUST be atomic, be consistent, durable,
and operate independently.
REQ-CP-3: It MUST be possible for the server to authenticate the
client.
REQ-CP-4: It MUST be possible for the client to authenticate the
server.
REQ-CP-5: It MUST be possible for message integrity to be ensured
between the client and the server.
REQ-CP-6: It MUST be possible for privacy to be ensured between the
client and server.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Eric Burger, Keith Drage, Brian
Rosen, Xiaotao Wu, Henning Schulzrinne, Simo Veikkolainen, Mary
Barnes and IETF conferencing design team for their feedback.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
8. References
8.1 Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", RFC 2119, BCD 14, March 1997.
[2] Rosenberg et al., J., "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC
3261, June 2002.
[3] Rosenberg, J., "A Framework for Conferencing with the Session
Initiation Protocol",
draft-rosenberg-sipping-conferencing-framework-01 (work in
progress), February 2003.
[4] Rosenberg, J., "A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event
Package for Conference State",
draft-ietf-sipping-conference-package-03 (work in progress),
February 2004.
8.2 Informative References
[5] Wu, X., Schulzrinne, H. and P. Koskelainen, "Use of SIP and SOAP
for conference floor control", draft-wu-sipping-floor-control-04
(work in progress), January 2003.
[6] Koskelainen, P., Schulzrinne, H. and X. Wu, "A sip-based
conference control framework", Nossdav'2002 Miami Beach, May
2002.
Authors' Addresses
Petri Koskelainen
Nokia
P.O. Box 100 (Visiokatu 1)
Tampere FIN-33721
Finland
EMail: petri.koskelainen@nokia.com
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
Hisham Khartabil
Nokia
P.O. Box 321
Helsinki FIN-00045
Finland
EMail: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft CPCP-req August 2004
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 (2004). 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.
Koskelainen & Khartabil Expires February 10, 2005 [Page 17]
