Network Working Group Request for Comments: 5167 Category: Informational Polycom March 2008

Similar documents
Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4573 Category: Standard Track July MIME Type Registration for RTP Payload Format for H.

Request for Comments: 5369 Category: Informational October Framework for Transcoding with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

Request for Comments: 5079 Category: Standards Track December Rejecting Anonymous Requests in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4597 Category: Informational Cisco Systems, Inc. July 2006

Request for Comments: 3959 Category: Standards Track December 2004

Network Working Group. BCP: 131 July 2007 Category: Best Current Practice

Ericsson D. Willis. Cisco Systems. April 2006

Request for Comments: 4715 Category: Informational NTT November 2006

Request for Comments: 4759 Category: Standards Track Neustar Inc. L. Conroy Roke Manor Research November 2006

Request for Comments: 5115 Category: Standards Track UCL January Telephony Routing over IP (TRIP) Attribute for Resource Priority

September The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) tel Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Parameter Registry. Status of This Memo

Request for Comments: 3968 Updates: 3427 December 2004 BCP: 98 Category: Best Current Practice

Network Working Group. Intended status: Standards Track Columbia U. Expires: March 5, 2009 September 1, 2008

Request for Comments: Ericsson February 2004

Request for Comments: 5179 Category: Standards Track May 2008

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4424 February 2006 Updates: 4348 Category: Standards Track

Request for Comments: May 2007

Category: Standards Track December 2007

Request for Comments: 3764 Category: Standards Track April enumservice registration for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Addresses-of-Record

Category: Standards Track October 2006

vcard Extensions for Instant Messaging (IM)

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track August Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4869 Category: Informational May Suite B Cryptographic Suites for IPsec. Status of This Memo

C. Martin ipath Services February A Policy Control Mechanism in IS-IS Using Administrative Tags

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track June Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option

Request for Comments: 4571 Category: Standards Track July 2006

Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc January The Secure Shell (SSH) Session Channel Break Extension

Request for Comments: 3934 Updates: 2418 October 2004 BCP: 94 Category: Best Current Practice

Network Working Group. Category: Informational May OSPF Database Exchange Summary List Optimization

Network Working Group. Cisco Systems June 2007

Authentication, Authorization and Accounting Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol

Network Working Group Request for Comments: August Address-Prefix-Based Outbound Route Filter for BGP-4

Category: Informational Woven Systems May 2008

Network Working Group. N. Williams Sun Microsystems June 2006

Request for Comments: 5208 Category: Informational May 2008

Category: Experimental June 2006

Request for Comments: 5010 Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. September 2007

Request for Comments: 4680 Updates: 4346 September 2006 Category: Standards Track

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track June 2005

Network Working Group. February 2005

Network Working Group Request for Comments: A. Zinin Alcatel-Lucent March 2007

Columbia University G. Camarillo Ericsson October 2005

Network Working Group. Updates: 3463, 4468, 4954 June 2008 Category: Best Current Practice. A Registry for SMTP Enhanced Mail System Status Codes

Expires: October 9, 2005 April 7, 2005

Request for Comments: 4255 Category: Standards Track SPARTA January Using DNS to Securely Publish Secure Shell (SSH) Key Fingerprints

Request for Comments: 3861 Category: Standards Track August 2004

Category: Informational June An Architectural Framework for Media Server Control

Request for Comments: 4633 Category: Experimental August 2006

Jabber, Inc. August 20, 2004

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track Samsung S. Kumar Tech Mahindra Ltd S. Madanapalli Samsung May 2008

Category: Standards Track September MIB Textual Conventions for Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track July 2007

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4603 Category: Informational Cisco Systems July Additional Values for the NAS-Port-Type Attribute

Request for Comments: Starent Networks A. Lior Bridgewater Systems K. Leung Cisco Systems October 2007

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track Juniper Networks August 2008

Category: Standards Track June Requesting Attributes by Object Class in the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Status of This Memo

Network Working Group. Category: Informational January 2006

Network Working Group Request for Comments: A. Zinin Alcatel-Lucent March OSPF Out-of-Band Link State Database (LSDB) Resynchronization

Category: Standards Track Cisco H. Tschofenig Nokia Siemens Networks August 2008

Network Working Group Request for Comments: Cisco Systems, Inc. December 2005

Request for Comments: K. Norrman Ericsson June 2006

Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. March 2005

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4558 Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems D. Papadimitriou Alcatel June 2006

Updates: 2409 May 2005 Category: Standards Track. Algorithms for Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1)

Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track January 2008

Category: Standards Track October Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)

Category: Standards Track June 2006

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4242 Category: Standards Track University of Southampton B. Volz Cisco Systems, Inc.

Request for Comments: 3932 October 2004 BCP: 92 Updates: 3710, 2026 Category: Best Current Practice

Category: Informational M. Shand Cisco Systems May 2004

Category: Standards Track LabN Consulting, LLC July 2008

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: R. Jain IPC Systems K. Rehor Cisco Systems, Inc. May 2014

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems May 2007

Network Working Group Internet-Draft August 2005 Expires: February 2, Atom Link No Follow draft-snell-atompub-feed-nofollow-00.

HIIT L. Eggert Nokia April Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Registration Extension

Category: Standards Track October 2006

Network Working Group Request for Comments: Cisco Systems, Inc. June 2006

Network Working Group. February Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) Redirect and Reset Package

Category: Standards Track August 2002

Network Working Group. Category: Informational September 2007

Category: Standards Track Redback Networks June 2008

Intended status: Standards Track August 15, 2008 Expires: February 16, 2009

Category: Standards Track March Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Transport Over TCP

Request for Comments: 4393 Category: Standards Track March MIME Type Registrations for 3GPP2 Multimedia Files

Network Working Group Request for Comments: February 2006

Category: Informational September 2004

Network Working Group. Category: Standards Track June Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Bootstrap Router MIB

February T11 Network Address Authority (NAA) Naming Format for iscsi Node Names

Category: Standards Track July The Post Office Protocol (POP3) Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) Authentication Mechanism

Request for Comments: Category: Best Current Practice June 2008

IETF TRUST. Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents. February 12, Effective Date: February 15, 2009

Network Working Group Internet-Draft January 25, 2006 Expires: July 29, Feed Rank draft-snell-atompub-feed-index-05.txt. Status of this Memo

Isode Limited March 2008

Request for Comments: January 2007

IETF TRUST. Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents. Approved November 6, Effective Date: November 10, 2008

Request for Comments: 4142 Category: Standards Track Nine by Nine November 2005

Network Working Group Internet-Draft August 2005 Expires: February 2, Atom Link No Follow draft-snell-atompub-feed-nofollow-03.

Request for Comments: 4755 Category: Standards Track December 2006

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 4143 Category: Standards Track Brandenburg November 2005

Intended status: Standards Track Expires: August 28, 2008 Hitachi A. Kobayashi NEC Corp. M. Stiemerling (Ed.) NEC Europe Ltd.

Transcription:

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 5167 Category: Informational M. Dolly AT&T Labs R. Even Polycom March 2008 Status of This Memo Media Server Control Protocol Requirements This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Abstract This document addresses the communication between an application server and media server. The current work in IETF working groups shows these logical entities, but it does not address the physical decomposition and the protocol between the entities. This document presents the requirements for a Media Server Control Protocol (MCP) that enables an application server to use a media server. It will address the aspects of announcements, Interactive Voice Response, and conferencing media services. Table of Contents 1. Introduction......................... 2 2. Terminology.......................... 2 3. Requirements......................... 3 3.1. Media Control Requirements................ 3 3.2. Media mixing Requirements................. 5 3.3. IVR Requirements..................... 6 3.4. Operational Requirements................. 6 4. Security Considerations.................... 6 5. Acknowledgments........................ 7 6. Informative References.................... 7 Dolly & Even Informational [Page 1]

1. Introduction The IETF conferencing framework in RFC 4353 [CARCH] presents an architecture that is built of several functional entities. RFC 4353 [CARCH] does not specify the protocols between the functional entities since it is considered out of scope. Based on RFC 4353 [CARCH], this document defines the requirements for a protocol that will enable one functional entity, known as an Application Server (AS), that includes the conference/media policy server, the notification server, and the focus, all defined in RFC 4353 [CARCH], to interact with one or more functional entities, called Media Server (MS), that serves as mixer or media server. The media server can also be used for announcements and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) functions. Application servers host one or more instances of a communication application. Media servers provide real time media processing functions. An example of the decomposition of a media server and an application server is described in the media control framework document [MEDIACTRL-FW]. This document presents the requirements for a Media Server Control Protocol (MCP) that enables an application server to control a media server. It will address the aspects of announcements, IVR, and conferencing media services. The requirements are for the protocol and do not address the AS or MS functionality discussed in the media control framework. Since the media server is a centralized component, the charter of the working group states that this work will not investigate distributed media processing algorithms or control protocols. 2. Terminology The media server work uses, when appropriate, and expands on the terminology introduced in the conferencing framework [CARCH] and Centralized Conferencing (XCON) framework [XCON-FRMWRK]. The following additional terms are defined: Application Server (AS) - A functional entity that hosts one or more instances of a communication application. The application server may include the conference policy server, the focus, and the conference notification server, as defined in [CARCH]. Also, it may include communication applications that use IVR or announcement services. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 2]

Media Server (MS) - The media server includes the mixer as defined in [CARCH]. The media server plays announcements, it processes media streams for functions like Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF) detection and transcoding. The media server may also record media streams for supporting IVR functions like announcing participants Media Resource Broker (MRB) - A logical entity that is responsible for both the collection of appropriate published Media Server (MS) information and supplying of appropriate MS information to consuming entities. The MRB is an optional entity and will be discussed in a separate document. Notification - A notification is used when there is a need to report event-related information from the MS to the AS. Request - A request is sent from the controlling entity, such as an application server, to another resource, such as a media server, asking that a particular type of operation be executed. Response - A response is used to signal information, such as an acknowledgement or error code in reply to a previously issued request. 3. Requirements 3.1. Media Control Requirements The following are the media control requirements: REQ-MCP-01 - The MS Control Protocol shall enable one or more application servers to request media services from one or more media servers. REQ-MCP-02 - protocol. The MS Control Protocol shall use a reliable transport REQ-MCP-03 - The applications supported by the protocol shall include conferencing and Interactive Voice Response media services. Note: Though the protocol enables these services, the functionality is invoked through other mechanisms. REQ-MCP-04 - Media types supported in the context of the applications shall include audio, tones, text, and video. Tones media include in-band audio or RFC 4733 payload. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 3]

REQ-MCP-05 - The MS control protocol should allow, but must not require, a media resource broker (MRB) or intermediate proxy to exist with the application server and media server. REQ-MCP-06 - On the MS control channel, there shall be requests to the MS, responses from the MS, and notifications to the AS. REQ-MCP-07 - SIP/SDP (Session Initiation Protocol / Session Description Protocol) shall be used to establish and modify media connections to a media server. REQ-MCP-08 - It should be possible to support a single conference spanning multiple media servers. Note: It is probable that spanning multiple MSs can be accomplished by the AS and does not require anything in the protocol for the scenarios we have in mind. However, the concern is that if this requirement is treated too lightly, one may end up with a protocol that precludes its support. REQ-MCP-09 - It must be possible to split call legs individually, or in groups, away from a main conference on a given media server, without performing re-establishment of the call legs to the MS (e.g., for purposes such as performing IVR with a single call leg or creating sub-conferences, not for creating entirely new conferences). REQ-MCP-10 - The MS control protocol should be extendable, facilitating forward and backward compatibility. REQ-MCP-11 - The MS control protocol shall include an authentication component to ensure that only an authorized AS can communicate with the MS, and vice versa. REQ-MCP-12 - The MS control protocol shall use some form of transport protection to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the data between the AS and MS. REQ-MCP-13 - Different application servers may have different privileges for using an MS. The protocol should prevent the AS from doing unauthorized operations on a MS. REQ-MCP-14 - The MS control protocol requires mechanisms to protect the MS resources used by one AS from another AS since the solution needs to support multiple ASs controlling one MS. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 4]

REQ-MCP-15 - During session establishment, there shall be a capability to negotiate parameters that are associated with media streams. This requirement should also enable an AS managing conference to specify the media streams allowed in the conference. REQ-MCP-16 - The AS shall be able to instruct the MS to perform stream operations like mute and gain control. REQ-MCP-17 - The AS shall be able to instruct the MS to play a specific announcement. REQ-MCP-18 - The AS shall be able to request the MS to create, delete, and manipulate a mixing, IVR, or announcement session. REQ-MCP-19 - The AS shall be able to instruct the MS to play announcements to a single user or to a conference mix. REQ-MCP-20 - The MS control protocol should enable the AS to ask the MS for a session summary report. The report may include resource usage and quality metrics. REQ-MCP-21 - The MS shall be able to notify the AS of events received in the media stream if requested by the AS. (Examples - STUN request, Flow Control, etc.) 3.2. Media mixing Requirements REQ-MCP-22 - The AS shall be able to define a conference mix; the MS may offer different mixing topologies. The conference mix may be defined on a conference or user level. REQ-MCP-23 - The AS may be able to define a custom video layout built of rectangular sub-windows. REQ-MCP-24 - For video, the AS shall be able to map a stream to a specific sub-window or to define to the MS how to decide which stream will go to each sub-window. REQ-MCP-25 - The MS shall be able to notify the ASs of who the active sources of the media are; for example, who the active speaker is or who is being viewed in a conference. The speaker and the video source may be different, for example, a person describing a video stream from a remote camera managed by a different user. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 5]

REQ-MCP-26 - The MS shall be able to inform the AS which layouts it supports. REQ-MCP-27 - The MS control protocol should enable the AS to instruct the MS to record a specific conference mix. 3.3. IVR Requirements REQ-MCP-28 - The AS shall be able to instruct the MS to perform one or more IVR scripts and receive the results. The script may be in a server or contained in the control message. REQ-MCP-29 - The AS shall be able to manage the IVR session by sending requests to play announcements to the MS and receiving the response (e.g., DTMF). The IVR session flow, in this case, is handled by the AS by starting a next phase based on the response it receives from the MS on the current phase. REQ-MCP-30 - The AS should be able to instruct the MS to record a short participant stream and play it back. This is not a recording requirement. 3.4. Operational Requirements These requirements may be applicable to the MRB, but they can be used by an AS if it has a one-to-one connection to the MS. REQ-MCP-31 - The MS control protocol must allow the AS to audit the MS state during an active session. REQ-MCP-32 - The MS shall be able to inform the AS about its status during an active session. 4. Security Considerations This document discusses high-level requirements for MCP. The MCP has some specific security requirements, which will be summarized here at a very high level. All of the operations and functions described in this document need to be authorized by an MS or an AS. It is expected that MS resources will be governed by a set of authorization rules defined as part of the AS / MS policy. In order for the policy to be implemented, the MS needs to be able to authenticate requests. Normal SIP mechanisms, including Digest authentication and certificates, can be used as specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261]. These MCP security requirements will be discussed in detail in the framework and protocol documents. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 6]

5. Acknowledgments This RFC represents the work from two previous personal works in progress, "Media Control Protocol Requirements" and "Requirements for a Media Server Control Protocol". The authors would like to acknowledge the work of Gary Munson from AT&T Labs, and James Rafferty from Cantata who helped write "Media Control Protocol Requirements", on which this work is based. 6. Informative References [CARCH] Rosenberg, J., "A Framework for Conferencing with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4353, February 2006. [MEDIACTRL-FW] Melanchuk, T., Ed., "An Architectural Framework for Media Server Control", Work in Progress, February 2008. [RFC3261] [XCON-FRMWRK] 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. Barnes, M., Boulton, C., and O. Levin, "A Framework for Centralized Conferencing", Work in Progress, November 2007. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 7]

Authors Addresses Martin Dolly AT&T Labs 200 Laurel Avenue Middletown, NJ 07748 USA Phone: EMail: mdolly@att.com URI: Roni Even Polycom 94 Derech Em Hamoshavot Petach Tikva 49130 Israel EMail: roni.even@polycom.co.il Dolly & Even Informational [Page 8]

Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). 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. 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, THE IETF TRUST 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. Intellectual Property 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. Dolly & Even Informational [Page 9]