H.248/MEGACO Registration Procedures
RFC 5615

Document Type RFC - Best Current Practice (August 2009; No errata)
Also known as BCP 151
Was draft-groves-megaco-pkgereg (individual in rai area)
Last updated 2013-03-02
Stream IETF
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream WG state (None)
Consensus Unknown
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state RFC 5615 (Best Current Practice)
Telechat date
Responsible AD Cullen Jennings
Send notices to Christian.Groves@nteczone.com, linyangbo@huawei.com, draft-groves-megaco-pkgereg@ietf.org, fluffy@cisco.com
Network Working Group                                          C. Groves
Request for Comments: 5615                                NTEC Australia
BCP: 151                                                          Y. Lin
Category: Best Current Practice                                   Huawei
                                                             August 2009

                 H.248/MEGACO Registration Procedures

Abstract

   This document updates the H.248/MEGACO IANA Package registration
   procedures in order to better describe the Package registration
   process and to provide a more formal review and feedback process.

Status of This Memo

   This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
   Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

Groves & Lin             Best Current Practice                  [Page 1]
RFC 5615          H.248/MEGACO Registration Procedures       August 2009

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................2
   2. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................4
   3. Formal Syntax ...................................................4
   4. Security Considerations .........................................5
   5. IESG Expert Reviewer Considerations .............................6
      5.1. Appointment of the IESG H.248/MEGACO Expert ................6
      5.2. Package Registration Procedure .............................6
      5.3. Error Code Registration Procedure ..........................8
      5.4. ServiceChange Reason Registration Procedure ................9
      5.5. Profile Name Registration Procedure .......................10
   6. IANA Considerations ............................................11
      6.1. New IANA Package Registration .............................11
      6.2. IANA Error Code Registration ..............................12
      6.3. IANA ServiceChange Reason Registration ....................12
      6.4. IANA Profile Name Registration ............................12
   7. References .....................................................13
      7.1. Normative References ......................................13
      7.2. Informative References ....................................13

1.  Introduction

   Since the initial development of H.248/MEGACO, a number of
   organizations have made use of the H.248/MEGACO protocol Package
   mechanism in order to allow a certain function to be controlled by
   H.248/MEGACO.  The H.248/MEGACO Package mechanism was introduced, in
   part, to allow organizations who had an in-depth knowledge in a
   particular functional area to independently produce a Package on this
   functionality.  This acknowledged the fact that neither the IETF
   MEGACO Working Group nor the ITU-T Study Group 16 possessed in-depth
   knowledge in all areas.  Whilst this approach has been successful in
   the number and range of Packages produced, in some cases these
   Packages were/are not fully aligned with H.248/MEGACO principles.
   Once a Package has been published and registered, it is problematic
   to rectify any issues.

   The introduction of problems/inconsistencies was caused, in part, by
   the fact that the Packages were not fully reviewed by H.248/MEGACO
   experts.  In fact, the IANA H.248/MEGACO registration process did not
   actually specify that an in-depth review should take place.

   The current H.248/MEGACO Package registration process was defined
   when the ITU-T Study Group 16 and the IETF MEGACO Working Groups were
   both active in H.248/MEGACO standardization and produced nearly all
   the registered Packages.  Packages were reviewed in the IETF MEGACO
   Working Group and the Working Group chair was the IESG-appointed

Groves & Lin             Best Current Practice                  [Page 2]
RFC 5615          H.248/MEGACO Registration Procedures       August 2009

   expert in charge of the review of the requests for H.248 Package
   registration.  This meant that H.248 Packages underwent an informal
   review before being registered.  However, this has changed.

   The current situation is that now the IETF MEGACO Working Group is
   disbanded and new H.248/MEGACO development typically occurs through
Show full document text