diff options
author | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
commit | 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch) | |
tree | e3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt | |
parent | ea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff) |
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt | 395 |
1 files changed, 395 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2a3e6e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt @@ -0,0 +1,395 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group J. Peterson +Request for Comments: 3953 NeuStar +Category: Standards Track January 2005 + + + Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service + Registration for Presence Services + +Status of this Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). + +Abstract + + This document registers a Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) service for + presence. Specifically, this document focuses on provisioning pres + URIs in ENUM. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 2. ENUM Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 3. Presence for E.164 Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 4. The 'E2U+pres' Enumservice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 5. Example of E2U+pres Enumservice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + Author's Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + + + + + + + + + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + +1. Introduction + + ENUM (E.164 Number Mapping, RFC 3761 [1]) is a system that uses DNS + (Domain Name Service, RFC 1034 [8]) to translate telephone numbers, + such as +12025332600, into URIs (Uniform Resource Identifiers, RFC + 2396 [9]), such as pres:user@host.com. ENUM exists primarily to + facilitate the interconnection of systems that rely on telephone + numbers with those that use URIs to identify resources. + + Presence is a service defined in RFC 2778 [2] that allows users of a + communications service to monitor one another's availability and + disposition in order to make decisions about communicating. Presence + information is highly dynamic and generally characterizes whether a + user is online or offline, busy or idle, away from communications + devices or nearby, and the like. + + The IETF has defined a generic URI used to identify a presence + service for a particular resource: the 'pres' URI scheme (defined in + CPP [4]). This document describes an enumservice for advertising + presence information associated with an E.164 number. + +2. ENUM Service Registration + + As defined in [1], the following is a template covering information + needed for the registration of the enumservice specified in this + document: + + Service name: "E2U+pres" + + URI scheme(s): "pres:" + + Functional Specification: See section 4. + + Security considerations: See section 6. + + Intended usage: COMMON + + Author: Jon Peterson (jon.peterson@neustar.biz) + + Any other information that the author deems interesting: See + section 3. + +3. Presence for E.164 Numbers + + This document specifies an enumservice field that allows presence + information to be provided for an E.164 number. This may include + presence states associated with telephones, or presence of non- + telephony communications services advertised by ENUM. + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + + Endpoints that participate in a presence architecture are known + (following the framework in RFC 2778 [2]) as watchers and + presentities. Watchers subscribe to the presence of presentities and + are notified when the presence of a presentity changes. Watchers + generally monitor the presence of a group of presentities with whom + they have an ongoing association. As an example, consider how this + might apply to a telephony service. Most cellular telephones today + have an address book-like feature, a small database of names and + telephone numbers. Such a telephone might act as a watcher, + subscribing to the presence of some or all of the telephone numbers + in its address book. The display of the telephone might then show + its user, when a presence-enabled telephone number is selected, the + availability of the destination. With this information, the user + might change their calling habits to correspond better to the + availability of his or her associates. + + The presence information that is shared varies by communications + service. The IETF has defined a Presence Information Data Format (or + PIDF [6]) for describing the presence data associated with a + presentity. The baseline PIDF specification declares only two + presence states: OPEN and CLOSED (these terms are defined in RFC 2778 + [2]); the former suggests that the destination resource is able to + accept communication requests, the latter that it is not. These two + states provide useful but rudimentary insight into the communications + status of a presentity. For that reason, PIDF is an extensible + format, and new sorts of statuses can be defined for specific + communications services. For example, a telephony-based presence + service might define a status corresponding to 'busy'. Extending + PIDF for telephony services is, however, outside the scope of this + document. + +4. The 'E2U+pres' Enumservice + + Traditionally, the services field of an NAPTR record (as defined in + [10]) contains a string composed of two subfields: a 'protocol' + subfield and a 'resolution service' subfield. ENUM in particular + defines an 'E2U' (E.164 to URI) resolution service. This document + defines an 'E2U+pres' enumservice for presence. + + The scheme of the URI that will appear in the regexp field of an + NAPTR record using the 'E2U+pres' enumservice SHOULD be the 'pres' + URI scheme. Other URI schemes appropriate to presence services MAY + be used; however, the use of the 'pres' URI scheme ensures a greater + level of compatibility than would the use of any URI specific to a + particular presence protocol. The purpose of a pres URI is to + provide a generic way to locate a presence service. Techniques for + dereferencing the pres URI to locate a presence service are given in + [5]. + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + + The 'pres' URI scheme does not identify any particular protocol that + will be used to handle presence operations (such as subscriptions and + notifications). Rather, the mechanism in [5] details a way to + discover whether the presence protocol(s) supported by the watcher + is/are also supported by the presentity. SIP [7] is one protocol + that can be used to convey presence information and manage + subscriptions/notifications. + +5. Example of E2U+pres enumservice + + The following is an example of the use of the enumservice registered + by this document in an NAPTR resource record. + +$ORIGIN 3.8.0.0.6.9.2.3.6.1.4.4.e164.arpa. + IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "E2U+pres" "!^.*$!pres:jon.peterson@example.net!" + +6. Security Considerations + + DNS does not make policy decisions about the records it shares with + an inquirer. All DNS records must be assumed to be available to all + inquirers at all times. The information provided within an ENUM + record set must therefore be considered open to the public -- which + is a cause for some privacy considerations. + + Revealing a pres URI in and of itself is unlikely to introduce many + privacy concerns, although, depending on the structure of the URI, it + might reveal the full name or employer of the target. The use of + anonymous URIs mitigates this risk. More serious privacy concerns + are associated with the unauthorized distribution of presence + information. For this reason, presence protocols have a number of + security requirements (detailed in RFC 2779 [3]) that call for + authentication of watchers, integrity and confidentiality properties, + and similar measures to prevent abuse of presence information. Any + presence protocol used in conjunction with the 'pres' URI scheme is + required to meet these requirements. + + Unlike a traditional telephone number, the resource identified by a + pres URI may require that callers provide cryptographic credentials + for authentication and authorization before presence information is + returned. In concert with presence protocols, ENUM can actually + provide far greater protection from unwanted callers than does the + existing PSTN, despite the public availability of ENUM records. + + + + + + + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + +7. IANA Considerations + + This document registers the 'E2U+pres' enumservice under the + enumservice registry described in the IANA considerations in RFC + 3761. Details of the registration are given in section 2. + +8. References + +8.1. Normative References + + [1] Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource + Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) + Application", RFC 3761, April 2004. + + [2] Day, M., Rosenberg, J., and H. Sugano, "A Model for Presence and + Instant Messaging", RFC 2778, February 2000. + + [3] Day, M., Aggarwal, S., Mohr, G., and J. Vincent, "Instant + Messaging / Presence Protocol Requirements", RFC 2779, February + 2000. + + [4] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)", RFC 3859, + August 2004. + + [5] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and + Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004. + +8.2. Informative References + + [6] Sugano, H., Fujimoto, S., Klyne, G., Bateman, A., Carr, W., and + J. Peterson, "Presence Information Data Format (PIDF)", RFC + 3863, August 2004. + + [7] 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. + + [8] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities", STD + 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. + + [9] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform + Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August + 1998. + + [10] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part + Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database", RFC 3403, October + 2002. + + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + +Author's Address + + Jon Peterson + NeuStar, Inc. + 1800 Sutter St. + Suite 570 + Concord, CA 94520 + USA + + Phone: +1 925/363-8720 + EMail: jon.peterson@neustar.biz + URI: http://www.neustar.biz/ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 3953 ENUM Registration for Presence Services January 2005 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). + + 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 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 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in IETF 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + +Peterson Standards Track [Page 7] + |