path: root/doc/rfc/rfc7006.txt

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                  M. Garcia-Martin
Request for Comments: 7006                                      Ericsson
Category: Standards Track                                S. Veikkolainen
ISSN: 2070-1721                                                    Nokia
                                                               R. Gilman
                                                          September 2013


             Miscellaneous Capabilities Negotiation in the
                   Session Description Protocol (SDP)

Abstract

   The Session Description Protocol (SDP) has been extended with a
   capability negotiation mechanism framework that allows the endpoints
   to negotiate transport protocols and attributes.  This framework has
   been extended with a media capabilities negotiation mechanism that
   allows endpoints to negotiate additional media-related capabilities.
   This negotiation is embedded into the widely used SDP offer/answer
   procedures.

   This memo extends the SDP capability negotiation framework to allow
   endpoints to negotiate three additional SDP capabilities.  In
   particular, this memo provides a mechanism to negotiate bandwidth
   ("b=" line), connection data ("c=" line), and session or media titles
   ("i=" line for each session or media).

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7006.











Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 1]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................3
   2. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................3
   3. Protocol Description ............................................4
      3.1. Extensions to SDP ..........................................4
           3.1.1. Bandwidth Capability ................................6
           3.1.2. Connection Data Capability ..........................8
           3.1.3. Title Capability ...................................12
      3.2. Session Level versus Media Level ..........................16
      3.3. Offer/Answer Model Extensions .............................17
           3.3.1. Generating the Initial Offer .......................17
           3.3.2. Generating the Answer ..............................17
           3.3.3. Offerer Processing of the Answer ...................18
           3.3.4. Modifying the Session ..............................18
   4. Field Replacement Rules ........................................18
   5. Security Considerations ........................................18
   6. IANA Considerations ............................................19
      6.1. New SDP Attributes ........................................19
      6.2. New Option Tags ...........................................20
      6.3. New SDP Capability Negotiation Configuration Parameters ...20
   7. Acknowledgments ................................................20
   8. References .....................................................20
      8.1. Normative References ......................................20
      8.2. Informative References ....................................21











Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 2]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


1.  Introduction

   The Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] is intended for
   describing multimedia sessions for the purposes of session
   announcement, session invitation, and other forms of multimedia
   session initiation.  SDP has been extended with an SDP Capability
   Negotiation Mechanism Framework [RFC5939] that allows the endpoints
   to negotiate capabilities, such as support for the Real-time
   Transport Protocol (RTP) [RFC3550] and the Secure Real-time Transport
   Protocol (SRTP) [RFC3711].  The SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation
   [RFC6871] provides negotiation capabilities to media lines as well.

   The capability negotiation is embedded into the widely used SDP
   offer/answer procedure [RFC3264].  This memo provides the means to
   negotiate further capabilities than those specified in the SDP
   Capability Negotiation Mechanism Framework [RFC5939] and the SDP
   Media Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871].  In particular, this memo
   provides a mechanism to negotiate bandwidth ("b="), connection data
   ("c="), and session or media titles ("i=").

   Since the three added capabilities are independent, it is not
   expected that implementations will necessarily support all of them at
   the same time.  Instead, it is expected that applications will choose
   their needed capability for their specific purpose.  For this reason,
   the normative part pertaining to each capability is in a self-
   contained section: Section 3.1.1 describes the bandwidth capability
   extension, Section 3.1.2 describes the connection data capability
   extension, and Section 3.1.3 describes the title capability
   extension.  Separate SDP Capability Negotiation option tags are
   defined for each capability, allowing endpoints to indicate and/or
   require support for these extensions according to procedures defined
   in SDP Capability Negotiation [RFC5939].

2.  Conventions Used in This Document

   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 BCP 14, RFC 2119
   [RFC2119] and indicate requirement levels for compliant
   implementations.











Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 3]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


3.  Protocol Description

3.1.  Extensions to SDP

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] and the SDP Media
   Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871] specify attributes for negotiating
   SDP capabilities.  These documents specify new attributes (e.g.,
   "acap", "tcap", "rmcap", and "omcap") for achieving their purpose.
   In this document, we define three new additional capability
   attributes for SDP lines of the general form:

      type=value

   for types "b", "c", and "i".  The corresponding capability attributes
   are respectively defined as:

   o  "bcap": bandwidth capability

   o  "ccap": connection data capability

   o  "icap": title capability

   From the sub-rules of the attribute ("a=") line in SDP [RFC4566], SDP
   attributes are of the form:

         attribute          = (att-field ":" att-value) / att-field
         att-field          = token
         att-value          = byte-string

   Capability attributes use only the "att-field:att-value" form.

   The new capabilities may be referenced in potential configurations
   ("a=pcfg") or in latent configurations ("a=lcfg") as productions
   conforming to the <extension-config-list>, as respectively defined in
   RFC 5939 [RFC5939] and RFC 6871 [RFC6871].

      extension-config-list = ["+"] ext-cap-name "=" ext-cap-list
      ext-cap-name          = 1*(ALPHA / DIGIT)
                              ; ALPHA and DIGIT defined in RFC 5234
      ext-cap-list          = 1*VCHAR  ; VCHAR defined in RFC 5234

   The optional "+" is used to indicate that the extension is mandatory
   and MUST be supported in order to use that particular configuration.








Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 4]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   The new capabilities may also be referenced in actual configurations
   ("a=acfg") as productions conforming to the <sel-extension-config>
   defined in RFC 5939 [RFC5939].

         sel-extension-config = ext-cap-name "=" 1*VCHAR

   The specific parameters are defined in the individual description of
   each capability below.

   The "bcap", "ccap", and "icap" capability attributes can be provided
   at the SDP session and/or media level.  According to the SDP
   Capability Negotiation [RFC5939], each extension capability must
   specify the implication of making it part of a configuration at the
   media level.

   According to SDP [RFC4566], "b=", "c=", and "i=" lines may appear at
   either session or media level.  In line with this, the "bcap",
   "ccap", and "icap" capability attributes, when declared at session
   level, are to be interpreted as if that attribute was provided with
   that value at the session level.  The "bcap", "ccap", and "icap"
   capability attributes declared at media level are to be interpreted
   as if that capability attribute was declared at the media level.

   For example, extending the example in [RFC6871] with "icap" and
   "bcap" capability attributes, we get the following SDP:

         v=0
         o=- 25678 753849 IN IP4 192.0.2.1
         s=
         c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1
         t=0 0
         a=bcap:1 CT:200
         a=icap:1 Video conference
         m=audio 54320 RTP/AVP 0
         a=rmcap:1 L16/8000/1
         a=rmcap:2 L16/16000/2
         a=pcfg:1 m=1|2 pt=1:99,2:98
         m=video 66544 RTP/AVP 100
         a=rmcap:3 H263-1998/90000
         a=rtpmap:100 H264/90000
         a=pcfg:10 m=3 pt=3:101 b=1 i=1

              Figure 1: Example SDP offer with bcap and icap
                          efined at session level







Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 5]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   The above SDP defines one PCMU audio stream and one H.264 video
   stream.  It also defines two RTP-based media capabilities ("rmcap"
   numbered 1 and 2), using 16-bit linear (L16) audio at 8 kbps and 16
   kbps, respectively, as well as an RTP-based media capability for
   H.263 video ("rmcap" numbered 3).  The RTP-based media capabilities
   all appear at the media level.  The example also contains a single
   bandwidth capability ("bcap") and a single title capability ("icap"),
   both defined at session level.  According to the definition above,
   when the capabilities defined in the "bcap" and "icap" attributes are
   referenced from the potential configuration, in the resulting SDP
   they are to be interpreted as session-level attributes (but the
   RTP-based media capabilities are to be interpreted as media-level
   attributes).

3.1.1.  Bandwidth Capability

   According to RFC 4566 [RFC4566], the bandwidth field denotes the
   proposed bandwidth to be used by the session or media.  In this memo,
   we specify the bandwidth capability attribute, which can also appear
   at the SDP session and/or media level.  The bandwidth field is
   specified in RFC 4566 [RFC4566] with the following syntax:

      b=<bwtype>:<bandwidth>

   where <bwtype> is an alphanumeric modifier giving the meaning of the
   <bandwidth> figure.

   In this document, we define a new capability attribute: the bandwidth
   capability attribute "bcap".  This attribute lists bandwidth as
   capabilities, according to the following definition:

      "a=bcap:" bw-cap-num 1*WSP bwtype ":" bandwidth CRLF

   where <bw-cap-num> is a unique integer within all the bandwidth
   capabilities in the entire SDP, which is used to number the bandwidth
   capability and can take a value between 1 and 2^31-1 (both included).
   The other elements are as defined for the "b=" field in SDP
   [RFC4566].

   This format satisfies the general attribute production rules in SDP
   [RFC4566], according to the following Augmented Backus-Naur Form
   (ABNF) [RFC5234] syntax:

         att-field       =/ "bcap"
         att-value       =/ bw-cap-num 1*WSP bwtype ":" bandwidth
         bw-cap-num      = 1*10(DIGIT)   ; DIGIT defined in RFC 5234

                 Figure 2: Syntax of the "bcap" attribute



Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 6]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   Negotiation of bandwidth per media stream can be useful when
   negotiating media encoding capabilities with different bandwidths.

3.1.1.1.  Configuration Parameters

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] provides for the
   existence of the "pcfg" and "acfg" attributes.  The concept is
   extended by the SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871] with an
   "lcfg" attribute that conveys latent configurations.

   Extensions to the "pcfg" and "lcfg" attributes are defined through
   <extension-config-list>, and extensions to the "acfg" attribute are
   defined through the <sel-extension-config>, as defined in the SDP
   Capability Negotiation [RFC5939].

   In this document, we extend the <extension-config-list> field to be
   able to convey lists of bandwidth capabilities in latent or potential
   configurations, according to the following Augmented Backus-Naur Form
   (ABNF) [RFC5234] syntax:

     extension-config-list  =/ bandwidth-config-list
     bandwidth-config-list  = ["+"] "b=" bw-cap-list *(BAR bw-cap-list)
                                 ; BAR defined in RFC 5939
     bw-cap-list            = bw-cap-num *("," bw-cap-num)
     bw-cap-num             = 1*10(DIGIT)   ; DIGIT defined in RFC 5234

                Figure 3: Syntax of the bandwidth parameter
                      in "lcfg" and "pcfg" attributes

   Each bandwidth capability configuration is a comma-separated list of
   bandwidth capability attribute numbers where <bw-cap-num> refers to
   the <bw-cap-num> bandwidth capability numbers defined explicitly
   earlier in this document, and hence MUST be between 1 and 2^31-1
   (both included).  Alternative bandwidth configurations are separated
   by a vertical bar ("|").

   The above syntax is very flexible, allowing referencing to multiple
   "b=" lines per configuration, even for the same <bwtype>.  While the
   need for such definitions is not seen, we have not restricted this,
   as it is not restricted in SDP [RFC4566] either.











Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 7]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   The bandwidth parameter to the actual configuration attribute
   ("a=acfg") is formulated as a <sel-extension-config> with

      ext-cap-name = "b"

   hence

     sel-extension-config =/ sel-bandwidth-config
     sel-bandwidth-config = "b=" bw-cap-list  ; bw-cap-list as above.

     Figure 4: Syntax of the bandwidth parameter in "acfg" attributes

3.1.1.2.  Option Tag

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] allows for
   capability negotiation extensions to be defined.  Associated with
   each such extension is an option tag that identifies the extension in
   question.  Hereby, we define a new option tag "bcap-v0" that
   identifies support for the bandwidth capability.  The endpoints using
   the "bcap" capability attribute SHOULD add the option tag to other
   existing option tags present in the "csup" and "creq" attributes in
   SDP, according to the procedures defined in the SDP Capability
   Negotiation Framework [RFC5939].

3.1.2.  Connection Data Capability

   According to SDP [RFC4566], the connection data field in SDP contains
   the connection data, and it has the following syntax:

      c=<nettype> <addrtype> <connection-address>

   where <nettype> indicates the network type, <addrtype> indicates the
   address type, and the <connection-address> is the connection address,
   which is dependent on the address type.

   At the moment, network types already defined include "IN", which
   indicates Internet network type, and "ATM" (see RFC 3108 [RFC3108]),
   used for describing Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) bearer
   connections.  The Circuit-Switched (CS) descriptions in the SDP
   document [SDP-CS] adds a "PSTN" network type for expressing a Public
   Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) circuit switch.










Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 8]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   SDP [RFC4566] permits specification of connection data at the SDP
   session and/or media level.  In order to permit negotiation of
   connection data at the media level, we define the connection data
   capability attribute ("a=ccap") in the form:

      "a=ccap:" conn-cap-num 1*WSP nettype SP addrtype SP
      connection-address CRLF

   where <conn-cap-num> is a unique integer within all the connection
   capabilities in the entire SDP, which is used to identify the
   connection data capability and can take a value between 1 and 2^31-1
   (both included).  The other elements are as defined in [RFC4566].

   This format corresponds to the [RFC4566] attribute production rules,
   according to the following Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)
   [RFC5234] syntax:

         att-field       =/ "ccap"
         att-value       =/ conn-cap-num 1*WSP nettype SP addrtype
                           SP connection-address
         conn-cap-num    = 1*10(DIGIT)   ; 1 to 2^31-1, inclusive
                                         ; DIGIT defined in RFC 5234

                 Figure 5: Syntax of the "ccap" attribute

   The "ccap" capability attribute allows for expressing alternative
   connections address ("c=") lines in SDP as part of the SDP Capability
   Negotiation process.  One of the primary use cases for this is
   offering alternative connection addresses where the <nettype> is "IN"
   or "PSTN", i.e., selecting between an IP-based bearer or a
   circuit-switched bearer.

   By supporting the "IN" <nettype>, the "ccap" attribute enables the
   signaling of multiple IPv4 and IPv6 addresses; however, the Standards
   Track mechanism for negotiation of alternative IP addresses in SDP is
   Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [RFC5245].  The "ccap"
   attribute does not change that; hence, the combined set of actual and
   potential configurations (as defined in [RFC5939]) for any given
   media description MUST NOT use the "ccap" attribute to negotiate more
   than one address with an IN network type (i.e., it is not permissible
   to select between "IPv4" and "IPv6" address families or different IP
   addresses within the same IP address family.

   Figure 6 is an example of an SDP offer that includes a "ccap"
   capability attribute.  An audio stream can be set up with an RTP flow
   or by establishing a circuit-switched audio stream:





Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                    [Page 9]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


             v=0
             o=2987933123 2987933123 IN IP4 198.51.100.7
             s=-
             t=0 0
             a=creq:med-v0,ccap-v0
             m=audio 38902 RTP/AVP 0 8
             c=IN IP4 198.51.100.7
             a=ccap:1 PSTN E164 +15555556666
             a=tcap:2 PSTN
             a=omcap:1 -
             a=acap:1 setup:actpass
             a=acap:2 connection:new
             a=acap:3 cs-correlation:callerid:+15555556666
             a=pcfg:1 c=1 t=2 m=1 a=1,2,3

            Figure 6: Example SDP offer with a "ccap" attribute

   The example in Figure 6 represents an SDP offer indicating an audio
   flow using RTP, such as the one represented in Figure 7, or an audio
   flow using a circuit-switched connection, such as the one represented
   in Figure 8.

             v=0
             o=2987933123 2987933123 IN IP4 198.51.100.7
             s=-
             t=0 0
             m=audio 38902 RTP/AVP 0 8
             c=IN IP4 198.51.100.7

             Figure 7: Equivalent SDP offer with the RTP flow

             v=0
             o=2987933123 2987933123 IN IP4 198.51.100.7
             s=-
             t=0 0
             m=audio 9 PSTN -
             c=PSTN E164 +15555556666
             a=setup:actpass
             a=connection:new
             a=cs-correlation:callerid:+15555556666

       Figure 8: Equivalent SDP offer with the circuit-switched flow

   This document does not define any mechanism for negotiating or
   describing different port numbers; hence, the port number from the
   "m=" line MUST be used by default.  Exceptions to this default can be
   provided by extension mechanisms or network type specific rules.
   This document defines an exception when the network type is "PSTN",



Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 10]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   in which case the port number is replaced with 9 (the "discard"
   port), as described in "Session Description Protocol (SDP) Extension
   for Setting Audio and Video Media Streams over Circuit-Switched
   Bearers in the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)" [SDP-CS].
   An endpoint offering alternative IP and PSTN bearers MUST include the
   IP media description in the actual configuration (IP address in the
   "c=" line and port number in the "m=" line) and the PSTN media
   description in the potential configuration.

   Exceptions for other network types, such as for the "ATM" network
   type defined in [RFC3108], require additional specifications.

3.1.2.1.  Configuration Parameters

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] provides for the
   existence of the "pcfg" and "acfg" attributes, which can convey one
   or more configurations to be negotiated.  The concept is extended by
   the SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871] with an "lcfg"
   attribute that conveys latent configurations.

   In this document, we define a <connection-config> parameter to be
   used to specify a connection data capability in a potential or latent
   configuration attribute.  The parameter follows the form of an
   <extension-config-list> with

      ext-cap-name = "c"

      ext-cap-list = conn-cap-list

   where, according to the following Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)
   [RFC5234] syntax:

         extension-config-list =/ conn-config-list
         conn-config-list      = ["+"] "c=" conn-cap-list
         conn-cap-list         = conn-cap-num *(BAR conn-cap-num)
         conn-cap-num          = 1*10(DIGIT)   ; 1 to 2^32-1 inclusive

                  Figure 9: Syntax of the connection data
                 parameter in "lcfg" and "pcfg" attributes

   Each capability configuration alternative contains a single
   connection data capability attribute number and refers to the
   conn-cap-num capability number defined explicitly earlier in this
   document; hence, the values MUST be between 1 and 2^31-1 (both
   included).  The connection data capability allows the expression of
   only a single capability in each alternative, rather than a list of
   capabilities, since no more than a single connection data field is




Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 11]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   permitted per media block.  Nevertheless, it is still allowed to
   express alternative potential connection configurations separated by
   a vertical bar ("|").

   An endpoint includes a plus sign ("+") in the configuration attribute
   to mandate support for this extension.  An endpoint that receives
   this parameter prefixed with a plus sign and does not support this
   extension MUST treat that potential configuration as not valid.

   The connection data parameter to the actual configuration attribute
   ("a=acfg") is formulated as a <sel-extension-config> with

      ext-cap-name = "c"

   hence

         sel-extension-config =/ sel-connection-config
         sel-connection-config = "c=" conn-cap-num  ; as defined above.

            Figure 10: Syntax of the connection data parameter
                           in "acfg" attributes

3.1.2.2.  Option Tag

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] solution allows
   for capability negotiation extensions to be defined.  Associated with
   each such extension is an option tag that identifies the extension in
   question.  Hereby, we define a new option tag of "ccap-v0" that
   identifies support for the connection data capability.  This option
   tag SHOULD be added to other existing option tags present in the
   "csup" and "creq" attributes in SDP, according to the procedures
   defined in the SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939].

3.1.3.  Title Capability

   SDP [RFC4566] provides for the existence of an information field
   expressed in the format of the "i=" line, which can appear at the SDP
   session and/or media level.  An "i=" line that is present at the
   session level is known as the "session name", and its purpose is to
   convey human-readable textual information about the session.

   The "i=" line in SDP can also appear at the media level, in which
   case it is used to provide human-readable information about the media
   stream to which it is related; for example, it may indicate the
   purpose of the media stream.  The "i=" line is not to be confused
   with the label attribute ("a=label:", [RFC4574]), which provides a
   machine-readable tag.  It is foreseen that applications declaring
   capabilities related to different configurations of a media stream



Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 12]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   may need to provide different identifying information for each of
   those configurations.  That is, a party might offer alternative media
   configurations for a stream, each of which represents a different
   presentation of the same or similar information.  For example, an
   audio stream might offer English or Spanish configurations, or a
   video stream might offer a choice of video source such as speaker
   camera, group camera, or document viewer.  The title capability is
   needed to inform the answering user in order to select the proper
   choice, and the label is used to inform the offering machine which
   choice the answerer has selected.  Hence, there is value in defining
   a mechanism to provide titles of media streams as capabilities.

   As defined in SDP [RFC4566], the session information field ("i=",
   referred to as "title" in this document) is subject to the
   "a=charset" attribute in order to support different character sets
   and hence internationalization.  The title capability attribute
   itself ("a=icap") is, however, not subject to the "a=charset"
   attribute as this would preclude the inclusion of alternative
   session/title information each using different character sets.
   Instead, the session/title value embedded in an "a=icap" attribute
   (title capability) will be subject to the "a=charset" value used
   within a configuration that includes that title capability.  This
   provides for consistent SDP operation while allowing for capabilities
   and configurations with different session/title information values
   with different character set encodings (with each such configuration
   including an "a=charset" value with the relevant character set for
   the session/title information in question).

   According to SDP [RFC4566], the session information ("i=") line has
   the following syntax:

      "i=" text

   where "text" represents a human-readable text indicating the purpose
   of the session or media stream.

   In this document, we define a new capability attribute: the title
   capability "icap".  This attribute lists session or media titles as
   capabilities, according to the following definition:

      "a=icap:" title-cap-num 1*WSP text

   where <title-cap-num> is a unique integer within all the connection
   capabilities in the entire SDP, which is used to identify the
   particular title capability and can take a value between 1 and 2^31-1
   (both included). <text> is a human-readable text that indicates the
   purpose of the session or media stream it is supposed to
   characterize.



Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 13]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   As an example, one might use:

      a=icap:1 Document Camera

   to define a title capability number 1 to identify a particular source
   of a media stream.

   Or, in another example, one might offer two title capabilities with
   different character encodings (using the charset attribute defined in
   "SDP: Session Description Protocol" [RFC4566] and the generic
   attribute capability attribute ("a=acap:") defined in "Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) Capability Negotiation" [RFC5939]).

               a=icap:1 [Text encoded in ISO-8859-1]
               a=acap:1 charset:ISO-8859-1
               a=icap:2 [Text encoded in UTF-8]
               a=acap:2 charset:UTF-8


   NOTE: Due to limitations of the ASCII encoding of RFCs, the actual
   text with non-printable characters cannot be represented in the text.
   See the PDF format of this RFC for a figure with non-printable
   characters.

   The title capability attribute satisfies the general attribute
   production rules in SDP [RFC4566], according to the following
   Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234] syntax:

         att-field       =/ "icap"
         att-value       =/ title-cap-num 1*WSP text
                                     ; text defined in RFC 4566
         title-cap-num   = 1*10(DIGIT)   ; DIGIT defined in RFC 5234

                 Figure 11: Syntax of the "icap" attribute

3.1.3.1.  Configuration Parameters

   The SDP Capability Negotiation Framework [RFC5939] provides for the
   existence of the "pcfg" and "acfg" attributes.  The concept is
   extended by the SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871] with an
   "lcfg" attribute that conveys latent configurations.










Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 14]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   In this document, we define a <title-config-list> parameter to be
   used to convey title capabilities in a potential or latent
   configuration.  This parameter is defined as an
   <extension-config-list> with the following associations:

      ext-cap-name = "i"

      ext-cap-list = title-cap-list

   This leads to the following definition for the title capability
   parameter:

         extension-config-list =/ title-config-list
         title-config-list     = ["+"] "i=" title-cap-list
         title-cap-list        = title-cap-num *(BAR title-cap-num)
                                         ; BAR defined in RFC 5939
         title-cap-num         = 1*10(DIGIT) ; DIGIT defined in RFC 5234

            Figure 12: Syntax of the title capability parameter
                      in "lcfg" and "pcfg" attributes

   Each potential capability configuration contains a single title
   capability attribute number where "title-cap-num" is the title
   capability number defined explicitly earlier in this document, and
   hence must be between 1 and 2^31-1 (both included).  The title
   capability allows the expression of only a single capability in each
   alternative, since no more than a single-title field is permitted per
   block.  Nevertheless, it is still allowed to express alternative
   potential title configurations separated by a vertical bar ("|").

   An endpoint includes a plus sign ("+") in the configuration attribute
   to mandate support for this extension.  An endpoint that receives
   this parameter prefixed with a plus sign and does not support this
   extension MUST treat that potential configuration as not valid.

   The title parameter to the actual configuration attribute ("a=acfg")
   is formulated as a <sel-extension-config> with

      ext-cap-name = "i"

   hence

         sel-extension-config =/ sel-title-config
         sel-title-config = "i=" title-cap-num  ; as defined above.

       Figure 13: Syntax of the title parameter in "acfg" attributes





Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 15]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


3.1.3.2.  Option Tag

   At present, it is difficult to envision a scenario in which the
   "icap" attribute must be supported or the offer must be rejected.  In
   most cases, if the icap attribute or its contents were to be ignored,
   an offered configuration could still be chosen based on other
   criteria such as configuration numbering.  However, one might imagine
   an SDP offer that contained English and Spanish potential
   configurations for an audio stream.  The session might be
   unintelligible if the choice is based on configuration numbering,
   rather than informed user selection.  Based on such considerations,
   it may well prove useful to announce the ability to use the icap
   attribute and its contents to select media configurations, or to
   inform the user about the selected configuration(s).  Therefore, we
   define a new option tag of "icap-v0" that identifies support for the
   title capability.  This option tag SHOULD be added to other existing
   option tags present in the "csup" and/or "creq" attributes in SDP,
   according to the procedures defined in the SDP Capability Negotiation
   Framework [RFC5939].  The discussion above suggests that "icap-v0"
   will typically appear in a "csup" attribute, but rarely in a "creq"
   attribute.

3.2.  Session Level versus Media Level

   The "bcap", "ccap", and "icap" attributes can appear at the SDP
   session and/or media level.  Endpoints MUST interpret capabilities
   declared at session level as part of the session level in the
   resulting SDP for that particular configuration.  Endpoints MUST
   interpret capabilities declared at media description as part of the
   media level in the resulting SDP for that particular configuration.

   The presence of the "bcap" capability for the same <bwtype> at both
   the session and media level is subject to the same constraints and
   restrictions specified in RFC 4566 [RFC4566] for the bandwidth
   attribute "b=".

   To avoid confusion, the <type-attr-num> for each "a=bcap", "a=ccap",
   and "a=icap" line MUST be unique across all capability attributes of
   the same type within the entire session description.












Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 16]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


3.3.  Offer/Answer Model Extensions

   In this section, we define extensions to the offer/answer model
   defined in SDP Offer/Answer Model [RFC3264] and extended in the SDP
   Capability Negotiation [RFC5939] to allow for bandwidth, connection,
   and title capabilities to be used with the SDP Capability Negotiation
   Framework.

3.3.1.  Generating the Initial Offer

   When an endpoint generates an initial offer and wants to use the
   functionality described in the current document, it first defines
   appropriate values for the bandwidth, connection data, and/or title
   capability attributes according to the rules defined in [RFC4566] for
   "b=", "c=", and "i=" lines.  The endpoint then MUST include the
   respective capability attributes and associated values in the SDP
   offer.  The preferred configurations for each media stream are
   identified following the media line in a "pcfg" attribute.  Bandwidth
   and title capabilities may also be referenced in latent
   configurations in an "lcfg" attribute, as defined in the SDP Media
   Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871].

   Implementations are advised to pay attention to the port number that
   is used in the "m=" line.  By default, a potential configuration that
   includes a connection data capability will use the port number from
   the "m=" line, unless the network type is "PSTN", in which case the
   default port number used will be 9.

   The offer SHOULD include the level of capability negotiation
   extensions needed to support this functionality in a "creq"
   attribute.

3.3.2.  Generating the Answer

   When the answering party receives the offer, and if it supports the
   required capability negotiation extensions, it SHOULD select the most
   preferred configuration it can support for each media stream and
   build the answer accordingly, as defined in Section 3.6.2 of the SDP
   Capability Negotiation [RFC5939].

   If the connection data capability is used in a selected potential
   configuration chosen by the answerer, that offer configuration MUST
   by default use the port number from the actual offer configuration
   (i.e., the "m=" line), unless the network type is "PSTN", in which
   case the default port MUST be assumed to be 9.  Extensions may be
   defined to negotiate the port number explicitly instead.





Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 17]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


3.3.3.  Offerer Processing of the Answer

   When the offerer receives the answer, it MUST process the media lines
   according to normal SDP processing rules to identify the media
   stream(s) accepted by the answer, if any, as defined in Section 3.6.3
   of the SDP Capability Negotiation [RFC5939].  The "acfg" attribute,
   if present, MUST be used to verify the proposed configuration used to
   form the answer and to infer the lack of acceptability of
   higher-preference configurations that were not chosen.

3.3.4.  Modifying the Session

   If, at a later time, one of the parties wishes to modify the
   operating parameters of a session, e.g., by adding a new media stream
   or by changing the properties used on an existing stream, it may do
   so via the mechanisms defined for SDP offer/answer [RFC3264] and in
   accordance with the procedures defined in Section 3.6.4 of the SDP
   Capability Negotiation [RFC5939].

4.  Field Replacement Rules

   To simplify the construction of SDP records, given the need to
   include fields within the media description in question for endpoints
   that do not support capabilities negotiation, we define some simple
   field-replacement rules for those fields invoked by potential or
   latent configurations.  In particular, any "i=" or "c=" lines invoked
   by a configuration MUST replace the corresponding line, if present
   within the media description in question.  Any "b=" line invoked by a
   configuration MUST replace any "b=" of the same bandwidth type at the
   media level, but not at the session level.

5.  Security Considerations

   This document provides an extension on top of the SDP [RFC4566], SDP
   Offer/Answer Model [RFC3264], SDP Capability Negotiation Framework
   [RFC5939], and SDP Media Capabilities Negotiation [RFC6871].  As
   such, the security considerations of those documents apply.

   The bandwidth capability attribute may be used for reserving
   resources at endpoints and intermediaries that inspect SDP.
   Modification of the bandwidth value by an attacker can lead to the
   network being underutilized (too high bandwidth value) or congested
   (too low bandwidth value).








Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 18]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   Similarly, by modifying the alternative connection address(es), an
   attacker would be able to direct media streams to a desired endpoint,
   thus launching a version of the well-known voice hammer attack (see
   Section 18.5.1 of [RFC5245]).

   The title capability provides for alternative "i=" line information,
   which is intended for human consumption.  However, manipulating the
   textual information could be misused to provide false information,
   leading to a bad user experience or the person using the service
   making a wrong choice regarding the available media streams.

   In case it is essential to protect the capability attribute values,
   one of the security mechanisms proposed in [RFC5939] SHOULD be used.

   The "i=" line, and thus the value carried in the title capability
   attribute, is intended for human-readable description only.  It
   should not be parsed programmatically.

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  New SDP Attributes

   IANA has registered new attributes in the "att-field (both session
   and media level)" subregistry of the "Session Description Protocol
   (SDP) Parameters" registry, according to the following registration
   form:

      Attribute name:      bcap
      Long form name:      Bandwidth Capability
      Type of attribute:   Both media and session level
      Subject to charset:  No
      Purpose:             Negotiate session or media-level bandwidths
      Appropriate values:  See RFC 7066, Section 3.1.1
      Contact name:        Miguel A. Garcia
                           Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com

      Attribute name:      ccap
      Long form name:      Connection Data Capability
      Type of attribute:   Both media and session level
      Subject to charset:  No
      Purpose:             Negotiate media-level connection data
      Appropriate values:  See RFC 7066, Section 3.1.2
      Contact name:        Miguel A. Garcia
                           Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com







Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 19]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


      Attribute name:      icap
      Long form name:      Title Capability
      Type of attribute:   Both media and session level
      Subject to charset:  Yes
      Purpose:             Negotiate human-readable information
                           describing the session or media
      Appropriate values:  See RFC 7066, Section 3.1.3
      Contact name:        Miguel A. Garcia
                           Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com

6.2.  New Option Tags

   IANA has added the new option tags "bcap-v0", "ccap-v0", and "icap-
   v0", defined herein, to the "SDP Capability Negotiation Option Tag"
   subregistry of the "Session Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters"
   registry.

6.3.  New SDP Capability Negotiation Configuration Parameters

   IANA has added the new parameter identifiers "b" for "Bandwidth", "c"
   for "Connection Data", and "i" for "Title" to the "SDP Capability
   Negotiation Configuration Parameters" subregistry of the "Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters" registry.  These parameters
   are permitted in "lcfg", "acfg", and "pcfg" attributes.

7.  Acknowledgments

   Thanks to Christer Holmberg, Alf Heidermark, and Ingemar Johansson
   for arguing for the existence of this document and reviewing it in
   the early stages.  Thanks to Flemming Andreasen, Andrew Allen, and
   Jonathan Lennox for a detailed review and many suggestions for
   improvement.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June
              2002.

   [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
              Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.





Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 20]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.

   [RFC5939]  Andreasen, F., "Session Description Protocol (SDP)
              Capability Negotiation", RFC 5939, September 2010.

   [RFC6871]  Gilman, R., Even, R., and F. Andreasen, "Session
              Description Protocol (SDP) Media Capabilities
              Negotiation", RFC 6871, February 2013.

8.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3108]  Kumar, R. and M. Mostafa, "Conventions for the use of the
              Session Description Protocol (SDP) for ATM Bearer
              Connections", RFC 3108, May 2001.

   [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.

   [RFC3711]  Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
              Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
              RFC 3711, March 2004.

   [RFC4574]  Levin, O. and G. Camarillo, "The Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Label Attribute", RFC 4574, August 2006.

   [RFC5245]  Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
              (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
              Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, April
              2010.

   [SDP-CS]   Garcia, M. and S. Veikkolainen, "Session Description
              Protocol (SDP) Extension for Setting Audio and Video Media
              Streams over Circuit-Switched Bearers in the Public
              Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)", Work in Progress, June
              2013.














Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 21]
^L
RFC 7006           SDP Misc. Capabilities Negotiation     September 2013


Authors' Addresses

   Miguel A. Garcia-Martin
   Ericsson
   Calle Via de los Poblados 13
   Madrid  28033
   Spain

   Phone: +34 91 339 1000
   EMail: miguel.a.garcia@ericsson.com


   Simo Veikkolainen
   Nokia
   P.O. Box 226
   NOKIA GROUP, FI  00045
   Finland

   Phone: +358 50 486 4463
   EMail: simo.veikkolainen@nokia.com


   Robert R. Gilman
   3243 W. 11th Ave. Dr.
   Broomfield, Colorado  80020
   U.S.A.

   Phone: +1 303 898 9780
   EMail: bob_gilman@comcast.net






















Garcia-Martin, et al.        Standards Track                   [Page 22]
^L