Internet DRAFT - draft-begen-mmusic-rfc4566bis-iana-updates
draft-begen-mmusic-rfc4566bis-iana-updates
Network Working Group A. Begen
Internet-Draft Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track January 10, 2015
Expires: July 14, 2015
IANA Registry Updates for RFC 4566bis
draft-begen-mmusic-rfc4566bis-iana-updates-01
Abstract
The Session Description Protocol (SDP) specification is currently
being revised. There are a number of issues that have been
identified in the IANA registries related to the SDP protocol (These
are tracked in the issue tracker). This document has the goal of
addressing these issues by making the necessary changes in the IANA
registries and registration procedures.
The changes and updates listed in this draft are submitted in this
individual draft rather than the 4566bis draft because (i) the
4566bis draft has seen quite a number of changes recently, which
require a detailed review and further revisions would make the review
process difficult, and (ii) the changes and updates listed in this
draft are all IANA related matters. If this draft gets published
separately, it will update RFC 4566 or the RFC resulting from the
4566bis draft. An alternative option is to include the whole text in
the 4566bis draft once the changes and updates are agreed.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 14, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Begen Expires July 14, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IANA Updates for 4566bis January 2015
Copyright (c) 2015 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Proposed Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1. Dependency between "nettype" and "addrtype" Registries . 2
3.2. New Network Type and Address Type Registrations . . . . . 3
3.3. Format of the "att-field" Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
The Session Description Protocol (SDP) specification is currently
being revised [I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis]. There are a number of
issues that have been identified in the IANA registries related to
the SDP protocol. This document has the goal of addressing these
issues by proposing changes in the IANA registries and registration
procedures.
2. Glossary of Terms
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119].
3. Proposed Changes
3.1. Dependency between "nettype" and "addrtype" Registries
Begen Expires July 14, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IANA Updates for 4566bis January 2015
The "nettype" registry resides at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml
#sdp-parameters-4
and the "addrtype" registry resides at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/sdp-parameters.xhtml
#sdp-parameters-5.
While there have been multiple network and address types have been
registered so far, not all address types are usable with every
network type. In other words, there exists a dependency between the
network and address types. This dependency should be reflected in
the registry.
Solution:
We add a new column in the "nettype" registry with the title "Usable
addrtype Values" and update the "nettype" registry as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Type | SDP Name | Usable addrtype Values | Reference |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|nettype | IN | IP4, IP6 | [RFC4566] |
|nettype | TN | RFC2543 | [RFC2848] |
|nettype | ATM | NSAP, GWID, E164 | [RFC3108] |
|nettype | PSTN | E164 | [RFC7195] |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Both [RFC7195] and [RFC3108] registered "E164" as an address type,
although [RFC7195] mentions that the "E164" address type has a
different context for ATM and PSTN networks.
In the case of a new addrtype registration, the author has to check
whether the new address type is usable with the existing network
types. If yes, the "nettype" registry MUST be updated accordingly.
In the case of a new nettype registration, the author MUST specify
the usable address type(s).
3.2. New Network Type and Address Type Registrations
New network and address types MUST be registered with IANA. These
registrations are subject to the RFC Required - RFC publication
policy of [RFC5226].
Begen Expires July 14, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IANA Updates for 4566bis January 2015
3.3. Format of the "att-field" Registry
Section 6 of [I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis] defines several attribute
names. However, the IANA registration (Section 8.2.4) does not
specify the format of the table. There are different usage levels
for SDP attributes and the usage level(s) for each attribute MUST be
reflected in the registry.
Solution:
We combine all the five "att-field" registries into one registry
called "att-field" registry, and update the columns to reflect the
name, usage level(s), charset dependency and reference. That is, we
use the following columns:
Name | Usage Level | Dependent on charset? | Reference
The "Name" column reflects the attribute name (as it will appear in
the SDP). The "Usage Level" column MUST indicate one or more of the
following: session, media, source. The "Dependent on charset?"
column MUST indicate "Yes" or "No" depending on whether the attribute
value is subject to the charset attribute. Finally, the "Reference"
column indicates the specification(s) where the attribute is defined.
4. Security Considerations
There are no security considerations.
5. IANA Considerations
This document proposes several changes in the IANA registries related
to the SDP protocol. These changes are listed in Section 3.
Editor's note: While it is not a common practice to use normative
language for the IANA considerations, it should be noted that the
normative language in this document applies to the registration
procedures (which may eventually move to
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis]).
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Begen Expires July 14, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IANA Updates for 4566bis January 2015
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[I-D.ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis]
Handley, M., Jacobson, V., Perkins, C., and A. Begen,
"SDP: Session Description Protocol", draft-ietf-mmusic-
rfc4566bis-12 (work in progress), September 2014.
6.2. Informative References
[RFC3108] Kumar, R. and M. Mostafa, "Conventions for the use of the
Session Description Protocol (SDP) for ATM Bearer
Connections", RFC 3108, May 2001.
[RFC7195] Garcia-Martin, M. and S. Veikkolainen, "Session
Description Protocol (SDP) Extension for Setting Audio and
Video Media Streams over Circuit-Switched Bearers in the
Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)", RFC 7195, May
2014.
Author's Address
Ali Begen
Cisco
181 Bay Street
Toronto, ON M5J 2T3
Canada
EMail: abegen@cisco.com
Begen Expires July 14, 2015 [Page 5]
