summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
committerThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
commit4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch)
treee3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt
parentea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff)
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc3953.txt395
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]
+