SIP Working Group James Polk Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Expires: January 9th, 2008 Intended Status: Standards Track Updates RFC 4412 (if published) New Session Initiation Protocol Resource-Priority Header Namespaces for the Defense Information Systems Agency draft-polk-sip-rph-new-namespaces-01 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 January 9th, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Abstract This document creates additional Session Initiation Protocol Resource-Priority header namespaces, to be IANA registered. This document intends to update RFC 4412, as a Proposed Standard document if published by the RFC-Editor. Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1 Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Creating an Implied RPH Namespace Delimiter . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1 One-Part or Two-Part Namespaces Do Not Change Anything . . 3 3. New RPH Namespaces Created . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction The US Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) is rolling out their Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) based architecture at this time. This network will require more Resource-Priority header (RPH) namespaces than were defined, and IANA registered, in RFC 4412 [RFC4412]. The purpose of this document is to define these additional namespaces. Each will be RFC 4412 defined preemption based in nature, and will have the same 5 priority-values. However, the need for additional namespaces is due to DISA's plan to have multiple divisions within their network, which will limit the ability of one of these divisions from preempting sessions identified as being from another namespace division. A simple example of this is within the DSN network, their may be a specific namespace assigned to the US Army, one to the US Navy, one to the US Air Force, and one to the US Marines. Each of these namespaces will need to be identified as being part of the DSN network, so each namespace will start with "dsn", such as dsn-usarmy.priority-value while another namespace within the dsn network is dsn-usmarines.priority-value and so on for the Navy and Air Force. A unique application of these different namespaces is that they will be able to gain preferential treatment only to SIP messages, and by extension - the sessions established with like namespaces, but not other messages/sessions with different namespaces. This is a local policy decision that RFC 4412 considers to be fundamental. In other words, messages with a namespace of dsn-usarmy may only have their RPH priority-values compared for preferential treatment to other dsn-usarmy namespaces, and not any other namespaces, unless Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 two or more (complete) namespaces are considered to be equivalent, as defined in section 8 of RFC 4412 [RFC4412]. This is all a matter of local policy. However, this policy is a known requirement from DISA to support moving forward. 1.1 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 [RFC2119]. 2. Creating an Implied RPH Namespace Delimiter As shown in section 1 of this document, the common ASCII character separating one namespace from another is the '-' dash character. The beginning 3 characters of each namespace created within this document is "dsn". This document does not officially split the RPH namespace into 3 parts, but RECOMMENDS another creating an IANA registered RPH namespace, or one that is not IANA registered, avoid the use of the '-' dash character unless they wish to have some implementations process this character as a delimiter because namespace parts. The DISA network, the original reason for the creation of the SIP Resource-Priority header, intends to use this character in this fashion. 2.1 One-Part or Two-Part Namespaces Do Not Change Anything The fact that there is a '-' dash character does not change the fact that everything on the left side of the '.' character is either the same or different. This means this document does not create a 2-part namespace, and by extension, a 3-part Resource-Priority header value. The simple fact that anything has changed on the left side of the '.' character means there is a new namespace to process, regardless of whether this difference is on the right or left side of a '-' dash character within what RFC 4412 defines as the namespace field within the RPH. That said, code in a SIP entity can look for the '-' dash character to identify a virtual delimiter to be used however that implementation wants. This is also viewed as an effective visual delimiter for anyone looking at the RPH namespace to see which subgroup within a primary domain the namespace belongs to (or within). The purpose of the characters on the left side of the '-' dash character in the RPH namespace is not binding, but is generally understood to be the domain identifier part of the namespace. Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Equally, the purpose of the characters on the right side of the '-' dash character in the RPH namespace is also not binding, but is generally understood to be the sub-domain identifier. Looking at the namespaces shown in section 1 of this document, DISA is defining all of these new namespaces to be within the "dsn" domain (the first part of all the namespaces here), of which all users within the US Army will communicate within. All the users within the US Navy, US Air Force and US Marines also will only communicate within the "dsn" domain. Thus the subdomain for these 4 groups are "usarmy", "usnavy", "usairforce", and "usmarines". This scenario creates four new RPH namespaces: dsn-usarmy dsn-usnavy dsn-usairforce dsn-usmarines that can be viewed as being part of the same network-ID ("dsn") and different subdomains, called a precedence-domain, which are separated by a '-' dash character. The '-' dash character is part of the overall single namespace of each. If any one (or more) character(s) in a namespace is different, it is to be considered a different namespace. For example, "dsn-usarmy" is a different namespace than "dsn-usarmy1", which is different than "dsn-usarmy2". The fact that the differences between these namespaces are on the right side of the '-' dash character means SIP, through RFC 4412, interprets the difference to be a namespace difference. Hence, a 417 (Unknown Namespace) is the appropriate response to a Resource-Priority header with an unrecognized namespace. The same is true for a comparison between these namespaces: "dsn-usarmy" and "dsn2-usarmy". 3. New RPH Namespaces Created The following 50 SIP Resource Priority header namespaces are created by this document: dsn-000000 dsn-000010 dsn-000020 dsn-000030 dsn-000001 dsn-000011 dsn-000021 dsn-000031 dsn-000002 dsn-000012 dsn-000022 dsn-000003 dsn-000013 dsn-000023 dsn-000004 dsn-000014 dsn-000024 dsn-000005 dsn-000015 dsn-000025 dsn-000006 dsn-000016 dsn-000026 dsn-000007 dsn-000017 dsn-000027 dsn-000008 dsn-000018 dsn-000028 dsn-000009 dsn-000019 dsn-000029 dsn-00000A dsn-00001A dsn-00002A dsn-00000B dsn-00001B dsn-00002B dsn-00000C dsn-00001C dsn-00002C Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 dsn-00000D dsn-00001D dsn-00002D dsn-00000E dsn-00001E dsn-00002E dsn-00000F dsn-00001F dsn-00002F Each namespace listed above will have the same 5 priority-levels: .0 (lowest priority) .2 .4 .6 .8 (highest priority) As stated earlier, one namespace will not be considered for preferential treatment over another namespace unless local policy has configured a SIP entity processing two messages (each with different namespaces) as being equivalent (see section 8 of RFC 4412 [RFC4412] for this detailed). The reality of this is, a message (or a call) with this RPH field of: dsn-000001.8 for example, will not have any preferential treatment over a message, for example, with this RPH field: dsn-000010.0 This is currently the policy within DISA. As stated in Section 9 of RFC 4412 [RFC4412], an IANA registered namespace SHOULD NOT change the number, and MUST NOT change the relative priority order, of its assigned priority-values. 4. IANA Considerations Abiding by the rules established within RFC 4412 [RFC4412], this is a Standards-Track document registering new SIP Resource-Priority header namespaces, and their associated priority-values and intended algorithms. 4.1 IANA Resource-Priority Namespace Registration Within the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" registry in the sip-parameters section of IANA, the following table lists the new RPH namespaces registered by this document (NOTE: RFCXXXX is to be replaced by this document's RFC number if this document is published by the RFC-Editor): Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Intended New warn- New resp. Namespace Levels Algorithm code code Reference ---------- ------ ------------ --------- --------- --------- dsn-000000 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000001 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000002 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000003 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000004 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000005 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000006 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000007 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000008 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000009 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000A 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000B 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000C 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000D 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000E 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00000F 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000010 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000011 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000012 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000013 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000014 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000015 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000016 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000017 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000018 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000019 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001A 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001B 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001C 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001D 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001E 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00001F 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000020 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000021 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000022 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000023 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000024 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000025 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000026 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000027 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000028 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000029 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002A 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002B 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002C 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002D 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002E 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-00002F 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] dsn-000030 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 dsn-000031 5 preemption no no [RFCXXXX] 4.2 IANA Priority-Value Registrations Within the "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registry in the sip- parameters section of IANA, the list of priority-values for each of the newly created RPH namespaces from section 4.1 of this document, prioritized least to greatest, is registered by the following: Namespace: dsn-000000 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000001 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000002 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000003 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000004 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000005 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000006 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000007 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000008 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000009 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Namespace: dsn-00000A Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00000B Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00000C Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00000D Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00000E Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00000F Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000010 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000011 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000012 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000013 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000014 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000015 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000016 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Namespace: dsn-000017 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000018 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000019 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001A Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001B Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001C Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001D Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001E Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00001F Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000020 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000021 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000022 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000023 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Namespace: dsn-000024 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000025 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000026 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000027 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000028 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000029 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002A Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002B Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002C Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002D Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002E Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-00002F Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Namespace: dsn-000030 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 Namespace: dsn-000031 Reference: RFCXXXX (this document) Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "2", "4", "6", "8" 5. Security Considerations This document has the same Security Considerations as RFC 4412. 6. Acknowledgements To Jeff Hewett for his helpful guidance in this effort. 7. References 7.1 Normative References [RFC4412] Schulzrinne, H., Polk, J., "Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4411, Feb 2006 [RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997 Author's Address James M. Polk 3913 Treemont Circle Colleyville, Texas 76034 USA Phone: +1-817-271-3552 Fax: none Email: jmpolk@cisco.com 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 Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft New SIP RPH Namespaces for DISA July 2007 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 (2007). 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 provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA). Polk Expires January 9th, 2008 [Page 12]