diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3351.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc3351.txt | 955 |
1 files changed, 955 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3351.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3351.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c567eae --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3351.txt @@ -0,0 +1,955 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group N. Charlton +Request for Comments: 3351 Millpark +Category: Informational M. Gasson + Koru Solutions + G. Gybels + M. Spanner + RNID + A. van Wijk + Ericsson + August 2002 + + + User Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) + in Support of Deaf, Hard of Hearing + and Speech-impaired Individuals + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + This document presents a set of Session Initiation Protocol + (SIP) user requirements that support communications for deaf, hard of + hearing and speech-impaired individuals. These user requirements + address the current difficulties of deaf, hard of hearing and + speech-impaired individuals in using communications facilities, while + acknowledging the multi-functional potential of SIP-based + communications. + + A number of issues related to these user requirements are further + raised in this document. + + Also included are some real world scenarios and some technical + requirements to show the robustness of these requirements on a + concept-level. + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Terminology and Conventions Used in this Document................2 + 2. Introduction.....................................................3 + 3. Purpose and Scope................................................4 + 4. Background.......................................................4 + 5. Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech-impaired Requirements for SIP...5 + 5.1 Connection without Difficulty................................5 + 5.2 User Profile.................................................6 + 5.3 Intelligent Gateways.........................................6 + 5.4 Inclusive Design.............................................7 + 5.5 Resource Management..........................................7 + 5.6 Confidentiality and Security.................................7 + 6. Some Real World Scenarios........................................8 + 6.1 Transcoding Service..........................................8 + 6.2 Media Service Provider.......................................9 + 6.3 Sign Language Interface......................................9 + 6.4 Synthetic Lip-reading Support for Voice Calls...............10 + 6.5 Voice-Activated Menu Systems................................10 + 6.6 Conference Call.............................................11 + 7. Some Suggestions for Service Providers and User Agent + Manufacturers...................................................13 + 8. Acknowledgements................................................14 + Security Considerations.........................................14 + Normative References............................................15 + Informational References........................................15 + Author's Addresses..............................................15 + Full Copyright Statement........................................17 + +1. Terminology and Conventions Used in this Document + + In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT","REQUIRED", + "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", + and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, + RFC2119[1] and indicate requirement levels for compliant SIP + implementations. + + For the purposes of this document, the following terms are considered + to have these meanings: + + Abilities: A person's capacity for communicating which could include + a hearing or speech impairment or not. The terms Abilities and + Preferences apply to both caller and call-recipient. + + Preferences: A person's choice of communication mode. This could + include any combination of media streams, e.g., text, audio, video. + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + The terms Abilities and Preferences apply to both caller and + call-recipient. + + Relay Service: A third-party or intermediary that enables + communications between deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired + people, and people without hearing or speech-impairment. Relay + Services form a subset of the activities of Transcoding Services (see + definition). + + Transcoding Services: A human or automated third party acting as an + intermediary in any session between two other User Agents (being a + User Agent itself), and transcoding one stream into another (e.g., + voice to text or vice versa). + + Textphone: Sometimes called a TTY (teletypewriter), TDD + (telecommunications device for the deaf) or a minicom, a textphone + enables a deaf, hard of hearing or speech-impaired person to place a + call to a telephone or another textphone. Some textphones use the + V.18[3] protocol as a standard for communication with other textphone + communication protocols world-wide. + + User: A deaf, hard of hearing or speech-impaired individual. A user + is otherwise referred to as a person or individual, and users are + referred to as people. + + Note: For the purposes of this document, a deaf, hard of hearing, or + speech-impaired person is an individual who chooses to use SIP + because it can minimize or eliminate constraints in using common + communication devices. As SIP promises a total communication + solution for any kind of person, regardless of ability and + preference, there is no attempt to specifically define deaf, hard of + hearing or speech-impaired in this document. + +2. Introduction + + The background for this document is the recent development of SIP[2] + and SIP-based communications, and a growing awareness of deaf, hard + of hearing and speech-impaired issues in the technical community. + + The SIP capacity to simplify setting up, managing and tearing down + communication sessions between all kinds of User Agents has specific + implications for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired + individuals. + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + As SIP enables multiple sessions with translation between multiple + types of media, these requirements aim to provide the standard for + recognizing and enabling these interactions, and for a communications + model that includes any and all types of SIP-networking abilities and + preferences. + +3. Purpose and Scope + + The scope of this document is firstly to present a current set of + user requirements for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired + individuals through SIP-enabled communications. These are then + followed by some real world scenarios in SIP-communications that + could be used in a test environment, and some concepts of how these + requirements can be developed by service providers and User Agent + manufacturers. + + These recommendations make explicit the needs of a currently often + disadvantaged user-group and attempt to match them with the capacity + of SIP. It is not the intention here to prioritize the needs of + deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people in a way that would + penalize other individuals. + + These requirements aim to encourage developers and manufacturers + world-wide to consider the specific needs of deaf, hard of hearing + and speech-impaired individuals. This document presents a + world-vision where deafness, hard of hearing or speech impairment are + no longer a barrier to communication. + +4. Background + + Deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people are currently + often unable to use commonly available communication devices. + Although this is documented[4], this does not mean that developers or + manufacturers are always aware of this. Communication devices for + deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people are + currently often primitive in design, expensive, and non-compatible + with progressively designed, cheaper and more adaptable communication + devices for other individuals. For example, many models of textphone + are unable to communicate with other models. + + Additionally, non-technical human communications, for example sign + languages or lip-reading, are non-standard around the world. + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + There are intermediary or third-party relay services (e.g. + transcoding services) that facilitate communications, uni- or bi- + directional, for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people. + Currently relay services are mostly operator-assisted (manual), + although methods of partial automation are being implemented in some + areas. These services enable full access to modern facilities and + conveniences for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people. + Although these services are somewhat limited, their value is + undeniable as compared to their previous complete unavailability. + + Yet communication methods in recent decades have proliferated: + email, mobile phones, video streaming, etc. These methods are an + advance in the development of data transfer technologies between + devices. + + Developers and advocates of SIP agree that it is a protocol that not + only anticipates the growth in real-time communications between + convergent networks, but also fulfills the potential of the Internet + as a communications and information forum. Further, they agree that + these developments allow a standard of communication that can be + applied throughout all networking communities, regardless of + abilities and preferences. + +5. Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech-impaired Requirements for SIP + + Introduction + + The user requirements in this section are provided for the benefit of + service providers, User Agent manufacturers and any other interested + parties in the development of products and services for deaf, hard of + hearing and speech-impaired people. + + The user requirements are as follows: + +5.1 Connection without Difficulty + + This requirement states: + + Whatever the preferences and abilities of the user and User Agent, + there SHOULD be no difficulty in setting up SIP sessions. These + sessions could include multiple proxies, call routing decisions, + transcoding services, e.g., the relay service Typetalk[5] or other + media processing, and could include multiple simultaneous or + alternative media streams. + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + This means that any User Agent in the conversation (including + transcoding services) MUST be able to add or remove a media stream + from the call without having to tear it down and re-establish it. + +5.2 User Profile + + This requirement states: + + Deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired user abilities and + preferences (i.e., user profile) MUST be communicable by SIP, and + these abilities and preferences MUST determine the handling of the + session. + + The User Profile for a deaf, hard of hearing or speech-impaired + person might include details about: + + - How media streams are received and transmitted (text, voice, video, + or any combination, uni- or bi-directional). + + - Redirecting specific media streams through a transcoding service + (e.g., the relay service Typetalk) + + - Roaming (e.g., a deaf person accessing their User Profile from a + web-interface at an Internet cafe) + + - Anonymity: i.e., not revealing that a deaf person is calling, even + through a transcoding service (e.g., some relay services inform the + call-recipient that there is an incoming text call without saying + that a deaf person is calling). + + Part of this requirement is to ensure that deaf, hard of hearing + and speech-impaired people can keep their preferences and abilities + confidential from others, to avoid possible discrimination or + prejudice, while still being able to establish a SIP session. + +5.3 Intelligent Gateways + + This requirement states: + + SIP SHOULD support a class of User Agents to perform as gateways for + legacy systems designed for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired + people. + + For example, an individual could have a SIP User Agent acting as a + gateway to a PSTN legacy textphone. + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +5.4 Inclusive Design + + This requirement states: + + Where applicable, design concepts for communications (devices, + applications, etc.) MUST include the abilities and preferences of + deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people. + + Transcoding services and User Agents MUST be able to connect with + each other regardless of the provider or manufacturer. This means + that new User Agents MUST be able to support legacy protocols through + appropriate gateways. + +5.5 Resource Management + + This requirement states: + + User Agents SHOULD be able to identify the content of a media stream + in order to obtain such information as the cost of the media stream, + if a transcoding service can support it, etc. + + User Agents SHOULD be able to choose among transcoding services and + similar services based on their capabilities (e.g., whether a + transcoding service carries a particular media stream), and any + policy constraints they impose (e.g., charging for use). It SHOULD + be possible for User Agents to discover the availability of + alternative media streams and to choose from them. + +5.6 Confidentiality and Security + + This requirement states: + + All third-party or intermediaries (transcoding services) employed in + a session for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people MUST + offer a confidentiality policy. All information exchanged in this + type of session SHOULD be secure, that is, erased before + confidentiality is breached, unless otherwise required. + + This means that transcoding services (e.g., interpretation, + translation) MUST publish their confidentiality and security + policies. + + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +6. Some Real World Scenarios + + These scenarios are intended to show some of the various types of + media streams that would be initiated, managed, directed, and + terminated in a SIP-enabled network, and shows how some resources + might be managed between SIP-enabled networks, transcoding services + and service providers. + + To illustrate the communications dynamic of these kinds of scenarios, + each one specifically mentions the kind of media streams transmitted, + and whether User Agents and Transcoding Services are involved. + +6.1 Transcoding Service + + In this scenario, a hearing person calls the household of a deaf + person and a hearing person. + + 1. A voice conversation is initiated between the hearing + participants: + + ( Person A) <-----Voice ---> ( Person B) + + 2. During the conversation, the hearing person asks to talk with the + deaf person, while keeping the voice connection open so that voice + to voice communications can continue if required. + + 3. A Relay Service is invited into the conversation. + + 4. The Relay Service transcodes the hearing person's words into text. + + 5. Text from the hearing person's voice appears on the display of the + deaf person's User Agent. + + 6. The deaf person types a response. + + 7. The Relay Service receives the text and reads it to the hearing + person: + + ( ) <------------------Voice----------------> ( ) + (Person A ) -----Voice---> ( Voice To Text ) -Text-> (Person B ) + ( ) <----Voice---- (Service Provider) <-Text- ( ) + + 8. The hearing person asks to talk with the hearing person in the + deaf person's household. + + 9. The Relay Service withdraws from the call. + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 8] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +6.2 Media Service Provider + + In this scenario, a deaf person wishes to receive the content of a + radio program through a text stream transcoded from the program's + audio stream. + + 1. The deaf person attempts to establish a connection to the radio + broadcast, with User Agent preferences set to receiving audio + stream as text. + + 2. The User Agent of the deaf person queries the radio station User + Agent on whether a text stream is available, other than the audio + stream. + + 3. However, the radio station has no text stream available for a deaf + listener, and responds in the negative. + + 4. As no text stream is available, the deaf person's User Agent + requests a voice-to-text transcoding service (e.g., a real-time + captioning service) to come into the conversation space. + + 5. The transcoding service User Agent identifies the audio stream as + a radio broadcast. However, the policy of the transcoding service + is that it does not accept radio broadcasts because it would + overload their resources far too quickly. + + 6. In this case, the connection fails. + + Alternatively, continuing from 2 above: + + 3. The radio station does provide text with their audio streams. + + 4. The deaf person receives a text stream of the radio program. + + Note: To support deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people, + service providers are encouraged to provide text with audio streams. + +6.3 Sign Language Interface + + In this scenario, a deaf person enables a signing avatar (e.g., + ViSiCAST[6]) by setting up a User Agent to receive audio streams as + XML data that will operate an avatar for sign-language. For outgoing + communications, the deaf person types text that is transcoded into an + audio stream for the other conversation participant. + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 9] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +For example: + +( )-Voice->(Voice To Avatar Commands) ----XMLData-->( ) +( hearing ) (deaf ) +( Person A)<-Voice-( Text To Voice ) <--------Text-------- (Person B) +( ) (Service Provider) ( ) + +6.4 Synthetic Lip-speaking Support for Voice Calls + + In order to receive voice calls, a hard of hearing person uses lip- + speaking avatar software (e.g., Synface[7]) on a PC. The lip- + speaking software processes voice (audio) stream data and displays a + synthetic animated face that a hard of hearing person may be able to + lip-read. During a conversation, the hard of hearing person uses the + lip-speaking software as support for understanding the audio stream. + + For example: + + ( ) <------------------Voice-------------->( ) + ( hearing ) ( PC with ) ( hard of ) + ( Person A) -------Voice-----> ( lip-speaking)---->( hearing ) + ( ) ( software ) ( Person B) + +6.5 Voice Activated Menu Systems + + In this scenario, a deaf person wishing to book cinema tickets with a + credit card, uses a textphone to place the call. The cinema employs + a voice-activated menu system for film titles and showing times. + + 1. The deaf person places a call to the cinema with a textphone: + + (Textphone) <-----Text ---> (Voice-activated System) + + 2. The cinema's voice-activated menu requests an auditory response to + continue. + + 3. A Relay Service is invited into the conversation. + + 4. The Relay Service transcodes the prompts of the voice-activated + menu into text. + + 5. Text from the voice-activated menu appears on the display of the + deaf person's textphone. + + 6. The deaf person types a response. + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 10] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + 7. The Relay Service receives the text and reads it to the voice- + activated system: + + ( ) (Relay Service ) ( ) + ( deaf ) -Text-> (Provider ) -Voice-> (Voice-Activated) + ( Person A ) <-Text- (Text To Voice ) <-Voice- (System ) + + 8. The transaction is finalized with a confirmed booking time. + + 9. The Relay Service withdraws from the call. + +6.6 Conference Call + + A conference call is scheduled between five people: + + - Person A listens and types text (hearing, no speech) + - Person B recognizes sign language and signs back (deaf, no speech) + - Person C reads text and speaks (deaf or hearing impaired) + - Person D listens and speaks + - Person E recognizes sign language and reads text and signs + + A conference call server calls the five people and based on their + preferences sets up the different transcoding services required. + Assuming English is the base language for the call, the following + intermediate transcoding services are invoked: + + - A transcoding service (English speech to English text) + - An English text to sign language service + - A sign language to English text service + - An English text to English speech service + + Note: In order to translate from English speech to sign language, a + chain of intermediate transcoding services was used (transcoding and + English text to sign language) because there was no speech-to-sign + language available for direct translation. Accordingly, the same + applied for the translation from sign language to English speech. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 11] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +(Person A) ----- Text ----> ( Text-to-SL ) --- Video ----> (Person B) + ---------------------- Text --------------------> (Person C) + ----- Text ----> (Text-to-Speech) --- Voice ----> (Person D) + ---------------------- Text --------------------> (Person E) + ----- Text ----> ( Text-to-SL ) --- Video ----> (Person E) +(Person B) -Video-> (SL-to-Text) -Text-> (Text-to-Speech) -> (Person A) + ---- Video ----> ( SL-to-Text ) ---- Text ----> (Person C) + -Video-> (SL-to-Text) -Text-> (Text-to-Speech) -> (Person D) + --------------------- Video --------------------> (Person E) + ---- Video ----> ( SL-to-Text ) ---- Text ----> (Person E) +(Person C) --------------------- Voice --------------------> (Person A) + Voice->(Speech-to-Text)-Text->(Text-to-SL)-Video->(Person B) + --------------------- Voice --------------------> (Person D) + ---- Voice ----> (Speech-to-Text) ---- Text ----> (Person E) + Voice->(Speech-to-Text)-Text->(Text-to-SL)-Video->(Person E) +(Person D) --------------------- Voice --------------------> (Person A) + Voice->(Speech-to-Text)-Text->(Text-to-SL)-Video->(Person B) + ---- Voice ----> (Speech-to-Text) ---- Text ----> (Person C) + ---- Voice ----> (Speech-to-Text) ---- Text ----> (Person E) + Voice->(Speech-to-Text)-Text->(Text-to-SL)-Video->(Person E) +(Person E) -Video-> (SL-to-Text) -Text-> (Text-to-Speech) -> (Person A) + --------------------- Video --------------------> (person B) + ---- Video ----> ( SL-to-Text ) ---- Text ----> (Person C) + -Video-> (SL-to-Text) -Text-> (Text-to-Speech) -> (Person D) + + Remarks: - Some services might be shared by users and/or other + services. + + - Person E uses two parallel streams (SL and English Text). + The User Agent might perform time synchronisation when + displaying the streams. However, this would require + synchronisation information to be present on the streams. + + - The session protocols might support optional buffering of + media streams, so that users and/or intermediate services + could go back to previous content or to invoke a + transcoding service for content they just missed. + + - Hearing impaired users might still receive audio as well, + which they will use to drive some visual indicators so + that they can better see where, for instance, the pauses + are in the conversation. + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 12] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +7. Some Suggestions for Service Providers and User Agent Manufacturers + + This section is included to encourage service providers and user + agent manufacturers in developing products and services that can be + used by as wide a range of individuals as possible, including deaf, + hard of hearing and speech-impaired people. + + - Service providers and User Agent manufacturers can offer to a deaf, + hard of hearing and speech-impaired person the possibility of being + able to prevent their specific abilities and preferences from being + made public in any transaction. + + - If a User Agent performs auditory signalling, for example a pager, + it could also provide another signalling method; visual (e.g., a + flashing light) or tactile (e.g., vibration). + + - Service providers who allow the user to store specific abilities + and preferences or settings (i.e., a user profile) might consider + storing these settings in a central repository, accessible no + matter what the location of the user and regardless of the User + Agent used at that time or location. + + - If there are several transcoding services available, the User Agent + can be set to select the most economical/highest quality service. + + - The service provider can show the cost per minute and any minimum + charge of a transcoding service call before a session starts, + allowing the user a choice of engaging in the service or not. + + - Service providers are encouraged to offer an alternative stream to + an audio stream, for example, text or data streams that operate + avatars, etc. + + - Service providers are encouraged to provide a text alternative to + voice-activated menus, e.g., answering and voice mail systems. + + - Manufacturers of voice-activated software are encouraged to provide + an alternative visual format for software prompts, menus, messages, + and status information. + + - Manufacturers of mobile phones are encouraged to design equipment + that avoids electro-magnetic interference with hearing aids. + + - All services for interpreting, transliterating, or facilitating + communications for deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people + are required to: + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 13] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + - Keep information exchanged during the transaction strictly + confidential + + - Enable information exchange literally and simply, without + deviating and compromising the content + + - Facilitate communication without bias, prejudice or opinion + + - Match skill-sets to the requirements of the users of the service + + - Behave in a professional and appropriate manner + + - Be fair in pricing of services + + - Strive to improve the skill-sets used for their services. + + - Conference call services might consider ways to allow users who + employ transcoding services (which usually introduce a delay) to + have real-time information sufficient to be able to identify gaps + in the conversation so they could inject comments, as well as ways + to raise their hand, vote and carry out other activities where + timing of their response relative to the real-time conversation is + important. + +8. Acknowledgements + + The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their + contributions to this document: + + David R. Oran, Cisco + Mark Watson, Nortel Networks + Brian Grover, RNID + Anthony Rabin, RNID + Michael Hammer, Cisco + Henry Sinnreich, Worldcom + Rohan Mahy, Cisco + Julian Branston, Cedalion Hosting Services + Judy Harkins, Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C. + Cary Barbin, Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C. + Gregg Vanderheiden, Trace R&D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison + Gottfried Zimmerman, Trace R&D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison + +Security Considerations + + This document presents some privacy and security considerations. + They are treated in Section 5.6 Confidentiality and Security. + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 14] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +Normative References + + [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement + Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [2] 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. + +Informational References + + [3] International Telecommunication Union (ITU), "Operational and + interworking requirements for DCEs operating in the text + telephone mode". ITU-T Recommendation V.18, November 2000. + + [4] Moore, Matthew, et al. "For Hearing People Only: Answers to Some + of the Most Commonly Asked Questions About the Deaf Community, + Its Culture, and the Deaf Reality". MSM Productions Ltd., 2nd + Edition, September 1993. + + [5] http://www.typetalk.org. + + [6] http://www.visicast.co.uk. + + [7] http://www.speech.kth.se/teleface. + +Authors' Addresses + + Nathan Charlton + Millpark Limited + 52 Coborn Road + London E3 2DG + Tel: +44-7050 803628 + Fax: +44-7050 803628 + EMail: nathan@millpark.com + + + Mick Gasson + Koru Solutions + 30 Howland Way + London SE16 6HN + Tel: +44-20 7237 3488 + Fax: +44-20 7237 3488 + EMail: michael.gasson@korusolutions.com + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 15] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + + Guido Gybels + RNID + 19-23 Featherstone Street + London EC1Y 8SL + Tel: +44-20 7296 8000 + Textphone: +44-20 7296 8001 + Fax: +44-20 7296 8199 + EMail: Guido.Gybels@rnid.org.uk + + Mike Spanner + RNID + 19-23 Featherstone Street + London EC1Y 8SL + Tel: +44-20 7296 8000 + Textphone: +44-20 7296 8001 + Fax: +44-20 7296 8199 + EMail: mike.spanner@rnid.org.uk + + Arnoud van Wijk + Ericsson EuroLab Netherlands BV + P.O. Box 8 + 5120 AA Rijen + The Netherlands + Fax: +31-161-247569 + EMail: Arnoud.van.Wijk@eln.ericsson.se + + Comments can be sent to the SIPPING mailing list. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 16] + +RFC 3351 SIP for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech Impaired August 2002 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Charlton, et al. Informational [Page 17] + |