Service in the PSTN/IN Requesting InTernet Service (spirits) Concluded WG
Note: The data for concluded WGs is occasionally incorrect.
|WG||Name||Service in the PSTN/IN Requesting InTernet Service|
|Area||Transport Area (tsv)|
|Dependencies||Document dependency graph (SVG)|
|Additional URLs||Additional SPIRITS web page|
Charter for Working Group
The Services in the PSTN/IN Requesting InTernet Services (SPIRITS)
Working Group addresses how services supported by IP network entities
can be started from IN (Intelligent Network) requests, as well as the
protocol arrangements through which PSTN (Public Switched Telephone
Network) can request actions to be carried out in the IP network in
response to events (IN Triggers) occurring within the PSTN/IN. SPIRITS
concerns architecture and protocols for secure transport of IN trigger
information (requests for actions, as well as plain event
including parameters) from PSTN/IN to the IP network, and optional
responses from the IP network back to the PSTN/IN.
The SPIRITS architecture includes, but not limited to, three
- the SPIRITS client
- the SPIRITS server
- the PSTN/IN requesting system
The SPIRITS client is the entity that requests notification or some
actions to be performed in the IP network. The SPIRITS server is the
entity that receives notifications or requests from the PSTN/IN and
returns optional responses back to the PSTN/IN, while initiating
execution of the services requested in the IP domain. The SPIRITS
server and PSTN/IN requesting sytem both reside in the IP domain, with
PSTN/IN entity on the boundary between the IP and PSTN/IN networks.
presence of three independent parties implies a requirement to support
complex trust models. Accordingly, the security architecture must
support limited trust between the parties.
The parameters passed in any SPIRITS Service request are limited
to information available from PSTN/IN entities. An example of such a
service is Internet Call Waiting: on an incoming PSTN call, an IP node
is notified of the call and can then carry out some actions. Definition
of any information or data within the PSTN is the responsibility of the
ITU-T and so is out of scope for SPIRITS.
The target of this working group is to describe building blocks for
PSTN-IP services that start from PSTN/IN requests, and not to
standardize the PSTN-IP services themselves. The WG will focus on an
event-oriented design, rather than a service-oriented design. Specific
services to be considered initially as examples are: (1) Incoming Call
Notification (Internet Call Waiting); (2) Internet Caller-Id Delivery;
and (3) Internet Call Forwarding and "Follow Me".
o Produce an Informational RFC that describes current practices
for supporting the services in question.
o Produce an Informational RFC on the overall architecture of
o Develop a Standards Track RFC that specifies a protocol by
which PSTN Intelligent Network Service Nodes (or any other
node that implements the Service Control Function) can
request services of IP hosts, and which can return status
indications to the PSTN/IN.
o Consider security and privacy issues relating to providing
functions of SPIRITS type. In particular, understand any
threats posed by this technology and address them in the
o Develop a standards track RFC for a SPIRITS MIB to support the
service management protocol between Internet applications and the
PSTN/IN Service Management System. The MIB is to conform to SNMP
SPIRITS will collaborate with other IETF WG's working on similar issues
and having expertise in PSTN/IP interworking (IPTEL, MMUSIC, PINT,
SPIRITS will also establish communication with other relevant standard
bodies (ITU-T SG11).
|Jan 2003||SPIRITS MIB submitted for publication as Proposed Standard|
|Dec 2002||SPIRITS protocol submitted for publication as Proposed Standard|
|Oct 2002||On selection of IN parameters for the SPIRITS Protocol document submitted for publication as an Informational RFC|
|Done||SPIRITS Architecture document submitted for publication as an Informational RFC|
|Done||Protocol Requirements Document submitted for publication as an Informational RFC|
|Done||Current Practice document submitted for publication as Informational|