Skip to main content

Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) Voiceband Data (VBD) Package and General-Purpose Media Descriptor Parameter Package
RFC 6498

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
10 (System) Notify list changed from joestone@cisco.com, s.sharma@cablelabs.com, rkumar@cisco.com, draft-stone-mgcp-vbd@ietf.org, fandreas@cisco.com to s.sharma@cablelabs.com
2012-08-22
10 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Sean Turner
2012-03-01
10 (System) RFC published
2011-12-19
10 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2011-12-19
10 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from Waiting on Authors
2011-12-08
10 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent.
2011-12-07
10 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2011-12-07
10 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2011-12-07
10 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2011-12-07
10 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2011-12-07
10 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2011-12-07
10 Amy Vezza Approval announcement text regenerated
2011-12-07
10 Amy Vezza State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup.
2011-12-05
10 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-12-05
10 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-10.txt
2011-08-06
10 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-08-06
09 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-09.txt
2010-12-03
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Telechat review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Carl Wallace.
2010-12-03
10 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2010-12-02
2010-12-02
10 Cindy Morgan State changed to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation.
2010-12-02
10 Tim Polk
[Ballot comment]
I support Sean's discuss. 

I would like to clarify if (1) there is a mandatory to implement security mechanism, or (2) if it …
[Ballot comment]
I support Sean's discuss. 

I would like to clarify if (1) there is a mandatory to implement security mechanism, or (2) if it is mandatory to implement one of the two security mechanisms.  Either (1) or (2) is okay, but I think it would be bad if the answer to both is "NO".

Additional detail is definitely needed to have interoperable implementations using IPsec.

I think additional information on SRTP is also required, but I could be wrong. :)
2010-12-02
10 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-02
10 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko
2010-12-02
10 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-02
10 Sean Turner [Ballot comment]
#1) Section 9: r/securuty/security
2010-12-02
10 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
#1) The security considerations recommend both IPsec and SRTP, but one is not specified as the mandatory-to-implement.  In order to achieve interop one …
[Ballot discuss]
#1) The security considerations recommend both IPsec and SRTP, but one is not specified as the mandatory-to-implement.  In order to achieve interop one needs to be picked or are you suggesting both be used?

#2) The security considerations say use IPsec as the end-to-end protection scheme.  It needs to say a whole lot more.  See Section 8 of RFC 5406.

#3) In the same veil is just pointing at SRTP sufficient to get two interoperable solutions?
2010-12-02
10 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2010-12-02
10 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-01
10 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-01
10 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-01
10 Peter Saint-Andre [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-12-01
10 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-11-30
10 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2010-11-22
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Carl Wallace
2010-11-22
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Carl Wallace
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Ballot has been issued
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Created "Approve" ballot
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo State changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup.
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Placed on agenda for telechat - 2010-12-02
2010-11-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Status Date has been changed to 2010-11-16 from 2010-05-14
2010-10-13
10 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2010-10-13
08 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-08.txt
2010-07-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Area acronymn has been changed to rai from gen
2010-07-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo State Changes to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised ID Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-07-16
10 Gonzalo Camarillo
We need a revised I-D to address the IETF LC comments. In particular, the security review by Carl Wallace and the Gen ART review by …
We need a revised I-D to address the IETF LC comments. In particular, the security review by Carl Wallace and the Gen ART review by Wassim Haddad.
2010-07-09
10 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2010-06-24
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Carl Wallace.
2010-06-16
10 Amanda Baber
IANA questions/comments:

- Do you want/need a registry of Symbols defined in Section 3.1?

- Do you want/need a registry of CoordinationTechniques as defined
in …
IANA questions/comments:

- Do you want/need a registry of Symbols defined in Section 3.1?

- Do you want/need a registry of CoordinationTechniques as defined
in Section 3.1.1?

- Do you want/need a registry of ReasonCodes as defined in Section 3.1.1?

- In Section 4.1 you define a LocalConnectionOption but don't register
it in the LocalConnectionOptions Sub-Registry. Should you register
this option?

Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following assignments
in the "Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) Package Registry" registry
located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/mgcp-packages/mgcp-packages.xhtml
sub-registry "MGCP Package Sub-Registry"

Package Title Name Version Reference
------------ ---- ------- ---------
Voiceband Data VBD 0 [RFC-stone-mgcp-vbd-07]
General-Purpose Media Descriptor Parameter GPMD 0 [RFC-stone-mgcp-vbd-07]

We understand the above to be the only IANA Action for this document.
2010-06-11
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Carl Wallace
2010-06-11
10 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Carl Wallace
2010-06-11
10 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2010-06-11
10 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2010-06-11
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Last Call was requested by Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-06-11
10 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2010-06-11
10 (System) Last call text was added
2010-06-11
10 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2010-06-11
10 Gonzalo Camarillo State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation by Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-06-10
10 Gonzalo Camarillo State Changes to AD Evaluation from Expert Review::External Party by Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-06-10
10 Gonzalo Camarillo The expert reviewer, Flemming Andreasen, is OK with the document.
2010-06-10
10 Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-06-10
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Note field has been cleared by Gonzalo Camarillo
2010-05-14
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Flemming will be performing an expert review on the draft.
2010-05-14
10 Gonzalo Camarillo Draft Added by Gonzalo Camarillo in state Expert Review
2010-04-05
07 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-07.txt
2009-10-16
06 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-06.txt
2009-07-10
05 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-05.txt
2009-03-04
04 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-04.txt
2009-01-04
10 (System) Document has expired
2008-07-03
03 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-03.txt
2007-11-16
02 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-02.txt
2007-06-07
01 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-01.txt
2007-02-26
00 (System) New version available: draft-stone-mgcp-vbd-00.txt