summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt337
1 files changed, 337 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a30e6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc5509.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,337 @@
+
+
+
+Network Working Group S. Loreto
+Request for Comments: 5509 Ericsson
+Category: Standards Track April 2009
+
+
+ Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registration
+ of Instant Messaging and Presence DNS SRV RRs
+ for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
+
+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) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
+ document authors. All rights reserved.
+
+ This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
+ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
+ publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
+ Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
+ and restrictions with respect to this document.
+
+Abstract
+
+ This document registers with IANA two new DNS SRV protocol labels for
+ resolving Instant Messaging and Presence services with SIP.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 1]
+
+RFC 5509 IANA SRV Label for SIP April 2009
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+ 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ 3. DNS SRV Usage of SIP with 'im' and 'pres' URIs . . . . . . . . 3
+ 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+ 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+ 5.1. Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label Registration . . . . . 5
+ 5.2. Presence SRV Protocol Label Registration . . . . . . . . . 5
+ 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+ 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+ Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 2]
+
+RFC 5509 IANA SRV Label for SIP April 2009
+
+
+1. Introduction
+
+ The Service Record (SRV) [RFC2782] identifies the host(s) that will
+ support particular services. The DNS is queried for SRV RR in the
+ general form:
+
+ _Service._Proto.Name
+
+ Service: the symbolic name of the desired service
+
+ Proto: the protocol of the desired service
+
+ Name: the domain name for which this record is valid
+
+ "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC3861]
+ provides guidance for locating the services associated with URIs that
+ employ the following two URI schemes [RFC3986]: 'im' for INSTANT
+ INBOXes [RFC3860] and 'pres' for PRESENTITIES [RFC3859].
+
+ In order to ensure that the association between "_im" and "_pres" and
+ their respective underlying services are deterministic, the IANA has
+ created two independent registries: the Instant Messaging SRV
+ Protocol Label registry and the Presence SRV Protocol Label registry.
+
+ This document defines and registers the "_sip" protocol label in both
+ registries so that computer programs can resolve 'im:' and 'pres:'
+ URIs down to SIP addresses.
+
+ Moreover, this document explains how the use of SIP for Presence and
+ Instant Messaging uses SRV.
+
+
+2. Terminology
+
+ The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+ "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+ document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
+
+
+3. DNS SRV Usage of SIP with 'im' and 'pres' URIs
+
+ Although there are standard procedures for resolving 'im' and 'pres'
+ URIs (Section 3 of [RFC3861]), the labels for SIP are not registered.
+
+ Section 5 of [RFC3428] states that if a user agent (UA) is presented
+ with an IM URI (e.g., "im:fred@example.com") as the address for an
+ instant message, it SHOULD resolve it to a SIP URI, and place the
+ resulting URI in the Request-URI of the MESSAGE request before
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 3]
+
+RFC 5509 IANA SRV Label for SIP April 2009
+
+
+ sending.
+
+ Following the procedures defined in [RFC3861], in order to resolve
+ the IM URI, the UA performs a SRV lookup for:
+
+ _im._sip.example.com
+
+ Assuming that the example.com domain offers a SIP service for instant
+ messaging at simple.example.com, this will result in a resolution of
+ _im._sip.example.com. to simple.example.com. Thus, the instant
+ messaging URI im:fred@example.com would resolve to a SIP URI of
+ sip:fred@simple.example.com.
+
+ SIP supports both pager [RFC3428] and session [RFC4975] IM mode.
+ However, a DNS SRV lookup does not specify which SIP IM mode a domain
+ offer. If the user agent client (UAC) supports both session mode and
+ pager mode, it is then suggested to try session mode first; if that
+ mode is rejected, the UAC has to be ready to fall back to pager mode.
+
+ Section 5 of [RFC3856] states that procedures defined in [RFC3861]
+ are also used to resolve the protocol-independent PRES URI for a
+ presentity (e.g., "pres:fred@example.com") into a SIP URI.
+
+ Following the procedures defined in [RFC3861], in order to resolve
+ the PRES URI, the UA performs a SRV lookup for:
+
+ _pres._sip.example.com
+
+ Assuming that the example.com domain offers a SIP presence service at
+ simple.example.com, this will result in a resolution of
+ _pres._sip.example.com. to simple.example.com. Thus, the protocol-
+ independent PRES URI pres:fred@example.com would resolve to a SIP URI
+ of sip:fred@simple.example.com.
+
+
+4. Security Considerations
+
+ This document merely serves for the registration of DNS SRV labels in
+ the appropriate IANA registry. The document does not specify a
+ protocol; therefore, there are no security issues associated with it.
+
+
+5. IANA Considerations
+
+ This specification registers a new SRV protocol label in both the
+ Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry and the Presence SRV
+ Protocol Label registry.
+
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 4]
+
+RFC 5509 IANA SRV Label for SIP April 2009
+
+
+5.1. Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label Registration
+
+ "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC3861]
+ defines an Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry for
+ protocols that can provide services that conform to the "_im" SRV
+ Service label. Because SIP is one such protocol, IANA registers the
+ "_sip" protocol label in the "Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label
+ Registry", as follows:
+
+ Protocol label: _sip
+
+ Specification: RFC 5509
+
+ Description: Instant messaging protocol label for the use of SIP for
+ Presence and Instant Messaging protocol as defined by
+ [RFC3428].
+
+ Registrant Contact: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
+
+5.2. Presence SRV Protocol Label Registration
+
+ "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC3861]
+ defines a Presence SRV Protocol Label registry for protocols that can
+ provide services that conform to the "_pres" SRV Service label.
+ Because the use of SIP for Presence and Instant Messaging is one such
+ protocol, the IANA registers the "_sip" protocol label in the
+ "Presence SRV Protocol Label Registry", as follows:
+
+ Protocol label: _sip
+
+ Specification: RFC 5509
+
+ Description: Presence protocol label for the use of SIP for Presence
+ and Instant Messaging protocol as defined by [RFC3856].
+
+ Registrant Contact: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
+
+
+6. Acknowledgments
+
+ The need for this registration was discussed with Jon Peterson and
+ Peter Saint-Andre.
+
+ Miguel Garcia reviewed this document on behalf of the Real-time
+ Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) Area Review Team (ART).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 5]
+
+RFC 5509 IANA SRV Label for SIP April 2009
+
+
+7. Normative References
+
+ [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+ Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
+
+ [RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
+ specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
+ February 2000.
+
+ [RFC3428] Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C.,
+ and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
+ for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002.
+
+ [RFC3856] Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
+ Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.
+
+ [RFC3859] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)",
+ RFC 3859, August 2004.
+
+ [RFC3860] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging
+ (CPIM)", RFC 3860, August 2004.
+
+ [RFC3861] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging
+ and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004.
+
+ [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
+ Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
+ RFC 3986, January 2005.
+
+ [RFC4975] Campbell, B., Mahy, R., and C. Jennings, "The Message
+ Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4975, September 2007.
+
+
+Author's Address
+
+ Salvatore Loreto
+ Ericsson
+ Hirsalantie 11
+ Jorvas 02420
+ Finland
+
+ Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Loreto Standards Track [Page 6]
+
+