Signaling Transport (sigtran) Concluded WG
Note: The data for concluded WGs is occasionally incorrect.
|Area||Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area (rai)||State||Concluded|
|Dependencies||Document dependency graph (SVG)|
Charter for Working Group
The primary purpose of this working group will be to address the
transport of packet-based PSTN signaling over IP Networks, taking into
account functional and performance requirements of the PSTN signaling.
For interworking with PSTN, IP networks will need to transport
such as Q.931 or SS7 ISUP messages between IP nodes such as a
Gateway and Media Gateway Controller or Media Gateway.
Examples of such transport include:
- transport of signaling between a Signaling Gateway and Media
or Media Gateway Controller
- transport of signaling ("backhaul") from a Media Gateway to a Media
- transport of TCAP between a Signaling Gateway and other IP nodes
- Internet dial-up remote access
- IP telephony interworking with PSTN
- Other services as identified
Specific goals are:
1. Architecture and Performance Requirements: The working group will
produce an informational RFC identifying functionality and
performance requirements to support signaling over IP. Signaling
messages have very stringent loss and delay requirements in the
existing telephone networks that need to be supported.
2- Transport: The working group will produce a standards track
proposal or proposals defining transport of signaling protocols
using SCTP, based on the requirements identified above.
These proposals will identify the method of encapsulation of different
signaling protocols. This will include differentiating between
different protocols being carried, and what components are
translated or terminated at the SG. Security and resilience must be
Note: TCAP is a transaction protocol with different functions and
requirements than call control signaling. This will need to be
taken into account in its mapping to IP networks.
This work will be done in conjunction with other IETF working
groups looking at similar issues. The working group will also
ensure that good information conduits exist with groups in other
standards groups with expertise in the relevant signaling
protocols or in the network requirements for the transport of
relevant signaling protocols.
The group will make use of existing IETF QoS and security technology
will not address creation of new QoS or security functions for IP
networks. Nor will the working group work on defining new call control
or device control protocols.
|Done||Submit implementation guidelines and other extensions based on testing to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Done||Submit remaining adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard|
|Done||Resubmit updated IUA specification to IESG for consideration as proposed standard|
|Done||Submit security framework to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Done||Submit protocol MIB draft to IESG for consideration as an Proposed Standard|
|Done||Submit protocol Applicability Statements draft to IESG for consideration as an Informationl RFC|
|Done||Submit initial adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard|
|Done||Submit IP-based transport protocol draft to IESG for publication as a Standards-track RFC|
|Done||Submit revised version of drafts incorporating discussions and early implementation experience.|
|Done||Submit requirements document to IESG for publication as an RFC|
|Done||Issue initial IDs on Transport Layer Protocols and Encapsulation of Signaling Protocols|
|Done||Submit Initial draft of Signaling Architecture and Performance Requirements document as an Internet-Draft|