Internet DRAFT - draft-lendl-speermint-technical-policy
draft-lendl-speermint-technical-policy
Session PEERing for Multimedia O. Lendl
INTerconnect enum.at
Internet-Draft August 2, 2006
Expires: February 3, 2007
Publishing Policies using the Domain Policy DDDS Application
draft-lendl-speermint-technical-policy-00
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 3, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
This documents contains the policy-type definition for "std" within
the Domain Policy DDDS Application. Using this policy-type, service
providers can announce to prospective callers which protocols (or
protocol extensions) need to be supported to reach this destination
network.
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Naming Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Internet Drafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Other Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Policy-Type template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 8
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
1. Introduction
The domain policy DDDS application [2] defines a generic method how a
domain owner may announce the conditions to accept incoming
communications. This documents defines the policy-type for
publishing a list of required standards (often protocol extensions)
which a caller must support.
The policy-type chosen for this application is "std".
Rules using the the "std" policy-type refer to published and thus
well-known rule-sets. These are thus "Publications" in the language
of [2]. Two parties can thus independently start to support and
require a standard and will interoperate without any coordination.
The examples in the Domain Policy DDDS I-D use this policy-type.
2. Protocol Extensions
Usually, protocols have built-in methods to signal support for
extensions to the core protocol. Such negotiations happen inside the
protocol and thus only after the connection has been established. If
protocol extensions are not optional, but required by the receiving
side, this can lead to the following unwanted effects:
o Delay: If the sender side can fall back to a different protocol or
delivery path than such an unsuccessful connection attempt costs
time.
o Layering problems: If the destination side requires special TLS or
IPsec parameters for the connection to succeed, it cannot tell the
sender side about these requirements within the protocol, as no
connection can be established with having conveyed these
parameters.
o Extension naming: Negotiations within the protocol usually use
IANA-assigned protocol identifiers. These might not be available
for experimental extensions.
The Domain Policy DDDS Application can be used to convey a list of
required protocol extensions to any prospective sender out-of-band of
the actual application protocol.
3. Naming Protocol Extensions
The Domain Policy DDDS Application uses URIs as identifiers for
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
individual policy rules. This is a good fit as URIs are perfect to
indicate standards.
3.1. RFCs
According to RFC 2648 [1] IETF RFCs can be referenced by the URIs of
the form "urn:ietf:rfc:<number>".
As an example, a record of
$ORIGIN example.com
@ IN NAPTR 10 50 "U" "D2P+SIP:std" (
"!^.*$!urn:ietf:rfc:3325!" . )
indicates that example.com expects incoming calls to use the SIP
Asserted Identity standard to transmit caller ID data.
3.2. Internet Drafts
RFC 2648 includes an URN definition for Internet Drafts as well.
These look like "urn:ietf:id:<author-wg-name-version>". RFC 2648
lists "urn:ietf:id:ietf-urn-ietf-06" as an example.
3.3. Other Standards
As a general rule, if the publishing organization has defined an URN
schema for its documents, that should be used. If not, the location
of the standard document on the official web-page can be used.
4. Policy-Type template
Policy Type: "std"
URI Scheme(s): Any URI is allowed.
Functional Specification: The URI acts as an identifier of
a standardization document which describes procedures
that a sender needs to follow.
Security considerations: None beyond the ones listed in
[2]
.
Intended usage: COMMON
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
Author: Otmar Lendl
5. Examples
The examples are for the SIP [4] peering case. To build complex
examples, the policy-type "fed" as described in [3] is also used.
o The carrier example.com only accepts SIP calls if a set of
features is present, he might publish a policy like this:
$ORIGIN example.com.
; order pref flags service regexp replacement
IN NAPTR 10 10 "U" "D2P+SIP:std" "!^.*$!urn:ietf:rfc:3325!" .
IN NAPTR 10 11 "U" "D2P+SIP:std" "!^.*$!urn:ietf:rfc:3326!" .
o In this example the "example.com" also allows incoming connections
as long they use the SIP remote party ID header. Calls according
to federation rules are preferred.
$ORIGIN example.com.
IN NAPTR 10 50 ( ; order priority
"U" "D2P+SIP:fed" ; flags service
"!^.*$!http://sipxconnect.example.org/!" . ; regexp repl
)
IN NAPTR 20 10 ( ; order priority
"U" "D2P+SIP:std" ; flags service
"!^.*$!urn:ietf:id:ietf-sip-privacy-02!" . ; regexp repl
)
6. Security Considerations
The publishing of the access policy via the DNS RR described in this
draft will reduce the amount of unwanted communication attempts, as
all well-meaning clients will follow them, but these records cannot
substitute measures to actually enforce the published policy.
7. IANA Considerations
This document registers the policy-type "std" for the domain policy
DDDS application.
8. Acknowledgements
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
The author would like to thank Alexander Mayrhofer and Michael
Haberler for their contributions.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[1] Moats, R., "A URN Namespace for IETF Documents", RFC 2648,
August 1999.
[2] Lendl, O., "The Domain Policy DDDS Application",
draft-lendl-domain-policy-ddds-00 (work in progress),
February 2006.
9.2. Informative References
[3] Lendl, O., "A Federation based VoIP Peering Architecture",
draft-lendl-speermint-federations-02 (work in progress),
August 2006.
[4] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A.,
Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP:
Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
Author's Address
Otmar Lendl
enum.at GmbH
Karlsplatz 1/9
Wien A-1010
Austria
Phone: +43 1 5056416 33
Email: otmar.lendl@enum.at
URI: http://www.enum.at/
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Policy Publication August 2006
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Lendl Expires February 3, 2007 [Page 8]
