Network Working Group P. Saint-Andre Internet-Draft XMPP Standards Foundation Intended status: Informational A. Houri Expires: July 7, 2008 IBM J. Hildebrand Jabber, Inc. January 4, 2008 Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Core draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-core-00 Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 7, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). Abstract As a foundation for the definition of application-specific, bi- directional protocol mappings between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), this document specifies the architectural assumptions underlying such Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 1] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 mappings as well as the mapping of addresses and error conditions. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Architectural Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3. XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Error Condition Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 14 Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 2] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 1. Introduction The IETF has worked on two signalling technologies that can be used for multimedia session negotiation, messaging, presence, capabilities discovery, notifications, and other application-level functionality: o The Session Initiation Protocol [SIP], along with various SIP extensions developed within the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE) Working Group. o The Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol [XMPP], along with various XMPP extensions developed by the IETF as well as by the XMPP Standards Foundation. Because these technologies are widely deployed, it is important to clearly define mappings between them for the sake of interworking. This document inaugurates a series of SIP-XMPP interworking specifications by defining the architectural assumptions underlying such mappings as well as the mapping of addresses and error conditions. Note: The capitalized key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [TERMS]. 2. Architectural Assumptions Protocol translation between SIP and XMPP could occur in a number of different entities, depending on the architecture of presence and messaging deployments. For example, protocol translation could occur within a multi-protocol server, within a multi-protocol client, or within a gateway that acts as a dedicated protocol translator. This document assumes that the protocol translation will occur within a gateway. (This assumption not meant to discourage protocol translation within multi-protocol clients or servers; instead, this assumption is followed mainly to clarify the discussion and examples so that the protocol translation principles can be more easily understood and can be applied by client and server implementors with appropriate modifications to the examples and terminology.) Specifically, we assume that the protocol translation will occur within an "XMPP-to-SIP gateway" that translates XMPP syntax and semantics on behalf of an XMPP service when communicating with SIP services and/or within a "SIP-to-XMPP gateway" that translates SIP syntax and semantics on behalf of a SIP service when communicating with XMPP services. Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 3] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 This document assumes that a gateway will translate directly from one protocol to the other. We further assume that protocol translation will occur within a gateway in the source domain, so that messages and presence information generated by the user of an XMPP service will be translated by a gateway within the trust domain of that XMPP service, and messages and presence information generated by the user of a SIP service will be translated by a gateway within the trust domain of that SIP service. An architectural diagram for a typical gateway deployment is shown below, where the entities have the following significance and the "#" character is used to show the boundary of a trust domain: o romeo@example.net -- a SIP user. o example.net -- a SIP service. o s2x.example.net -- a SIP-to-XMPP gateway. o juliet@example.com -- an XMPP user. o example.com -- an XMPP service. o x2s.example.com -- an XMPP-to-SIP gateway. ##################################################################### # # # # +-- s2x.example.net---#------------- example.com # # | # | | # # example.net -----------------#--- x2s.example.com | # # | # | # # | # | # # romeo@example.net # juliet@example.com # # # # ##################################################################### 3. Address Mapping 3.1. Overview The basic SIP address format is a "sip:" or "sips:" URI as specified in [SIP]. When a SIP entity supports extensions for instant messageing it may be identified by an 'im:' URI as specified in [CPIM] (see [SIP-IM]) and when a SIP entity spports extensions for presence it may be identified by a 'pres:' URI as specified in [CPP] (see [SIP-PRES]). The XMPP address format is specified in [XMPP]; as specified in [XMPP-IM], instant messaging and presence applications of XMPP must also support 'im:' and 'pres:' URIs as specified in [CPIM] and [CPP] respectively, although such support may simply involve leaving resolution of such addresses up to an XMPP server. Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 4] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 In this document we describe mappings for addresses of the form only, ignoring (for the purpose of address mapping) any protocol-specific extensions such as SIP telephone numbers and passwords or XMPP resource identifiers. In addition, we have ruled the mapping of domain names as out of scope for now since that is a matter for the Domain Name System; specifically, the issue for interworking between SIP and XMPP relates to the translation of fully internationalized domain names (which the SIP address format does not allow, but which the XMPP address format does allow via [IDNA]) into non-internationalized domain names. Therefore, in the following sections we discuss local-part addresses only (these are called variously "usernames", "instant inboxes", "presentities", and "node identifiers" in the protocols at issue). The sip:/sips:, im:/pres:, and XMPP address schemes allow different sets of characters (although all three allow alphanumeric characters and disallow both spaces and control characters). In some cases, characters allowed in one scheme are disallowed in others; these characters must be mapped appropriately in order to ensure interworking across systems. The local-part address in sip:/sips: URIs inherits from the "userinfo" rule in [URI] with several changes; here we discuss the SIP "user" rule only: user = 1*( unreserved / escaped / user-unreserved ) user-unreserved = "&" / "=" / "+" / "$" / "," / ";" / "?" / "/" unreserved = alphanum / mark mark = "-" / "_" / "." / "!" / "~" / "*" / "'" / "(" / ")" Here we make the simplifying assumption that the local-part address in im:/pres: URIs inherits from the "dot-atom-text" rule in [RFC2822] rather than the more complicated "local-part" rule: dot-atom-text = 1*atext *("." 1*atext) atext = ALPHA / DIGIT / ; Any character except controls, "!" / "#" / ; SP, and specials. "$" / "%" / ; Used for atoms "&" / "'" / "*" / "+" / "-" / "/" / "=" / "?" / "^" / "_" / "`" / "{" / "|" / "}" / "~" Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 5] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 The local-part address in XMPP addresses allows any US-ASCII character except space, controls, and the " & ' / : < > @ characters. Therefore, following table lists the allowed and disallowed characters in the local-part addresses of each protocol (aside from the alphanumeric, space, and control characters), in order by hexadecimal character number (where the "A" row shows the allowed characters and the "D" row shows the disallowed characters). Table 1: Allowed and disallowed characters +---+----------------------------------+ | SIP/SIPS CHARACTERS | +---+----------------------------------+ | A | ! $ &'()*+,-./ ; = ? _ ~ | | D | "# % : < > @[\]^ `{|} | +---+----------------------------------+ | IM/PRES CHARACTERS | +---+----------------------------------+ | A | ! #$%&' *+ - / = ? ^_`{|}~ | | D | " () , . :;< > @[\] | +---+----------------------------------+ | XMPP CHARACTERS | +---+----------------------------------+ | A | ! #$% ()*+,-. ; = ? [\]^_`{|}~ | | D | " &' /: < > @ | +---+----------------------------------+ When transforming a local-part address from one scheme to another, an application SHOULD proceed as follows: 1. Unescape any escaped characters in the source address (e.g., from SIP to XMPP unescape "%2F" to "/" and from XMPP to SIP unescape "\27" to "'"). 2. Leave unmodified any characters that are allowed in the destination scheme. 3. Escape any characters that are allowed in the source scheme but reserved in the destination scheme, as escaping is defined for the destination scheme. In particular: * Where the destination scheme is a URI (i.e., an im:, pres:, sip:, or sips: URI), each reserved character MUST be percent- encoded to "%hexhex" as specified in Section 2.6 of [URL-GUIDE] (e.g., when transforming from XMPP to SIP, encode "/" as "%2F"). * Where the destination scheme is a native XMPP address, each reserved character MUST be encoded to "\hexhex" as specified in [XEP-0106] (e.g., when transforming from SIP to XMPP, encode "'" as "\27"). Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 6] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 3.2. SIP to XMPP The following is a high-level algorithm for mapping a sip:, sips:, im:, or pres: URI to an XMPP address: 1. Remove URI scheme. 2. Split at the first '@' character into local-part and hostname (mapping the latter is out of scope). 3. Translate %hexhex to equivalent octets. 4. Treat result as a UTF-8 string. 5. Translate "&" to "\26", "'" to "\27", and "/" to "\2f" respectively in order to properly handle the characters disallowed in XMPP addresses but allowed in sip:/sips: URIs and im:/pres: URIs as shown in Column 3 of Table 3 above (this is consistent with [XEP-0106]). 6. Apply Nodeprep profile of [STRINGPREP] (as specified in [XMPP]) for canonicalization (OPTIONAL). 7. Recombine local-part with mapped hostname to form local@domain address. 3.3. XMPP to SIP The following is a high-level algorithm for mapping an XMPP address to a sip:, sips:, im:, or pres: URI: 1. Split XMPP address into node identifier (local-part; mapping described in remaining steps), domain identifier (hostname; mapping is out of scope), and resource identifier (specifier for particular device or connection; discard this for cross-system interworking). 2. Apply Nodeprep profile of [STRINGPREP] (as specified in [XMPP]) for canonicalization (OPTIONAL). 3. Translate "\26" to "&", "\27" to "'", and "\2f" to "/" respectively (this is consistent with [XEP-0106]). 4. Determine if the foreign domain supports im: and pres: URIs (discovered via [SRV] lookup as specified in [XMPP-IM]), else assume that the foreign domain supports sip:/sips: URIs. 5. If converting into im: or pres: URI, for each byte, if the byte is in the set (),.;[\] (i.e., the partial complement from Row 3, Column 2 of Table 3 above) or is a UTF-8 character outside the US-ASCII range then transform that byte to %hexhex. If converting into sip: or sips: URI, for each byte, if the byte is in the set #%[\]^`{|} (i.e., the partial complement from Row 3, Column 1 of Table 3 above) or is a UTF-8 character outside the US-ASCII range then transform that byte to %hexhex. 6. Combine resulting local-part with mapped hostname to form local@domain address. Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 7] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 7. Prepend with 'im:' scheme (for XMPP stanzas) or 'pres:' scheme (for XMPP stanzas) if foreign domain supports these, else prepend with 'sip:' or 'sips:' scheme according to local service policy. 4. Error Condition Mapping SIP response codes are specified in [SIP] and XMPP error conditions are specified in [XMPP]. 4.1. XMPP to SIP Table 8: Mapping of XMPP error conditions to SIP response codes +------------------------------+---------------------+ | XMPP Error Condition | SIP Response Code | +------------------------------+---------------------+ | | 400 | | | 400 | | | 501 | | | 403 | | | 410 | | | 500 | | | 404 | | | 484 | | | 406 | | | 405 | | | 401 | | | 402 | | | 480 | | | 300 | | | 407 | | | 502 | | | 504 | | | 500 | | | 503 | | | 407 | | | 400 | | | 491 | +------------------------------+---------------------+ 4.2. SIP to XMPP The mapping of SIP response codes to XMPP error conditions SHOULD be as follows (note that XMPP does not include 100-series or 200-series response codes, only error conditions): Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 8] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 Table 9: Mapping of SIP response codes to XMPP error conditions Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 9] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 +---------------------+------------------------------+ | SIP Response Code | XMPP Error Condition | +---------------------+------------------------------+ | 300 | | | 301 | | | 302 | | | 305 | | | 380 | | | 400 | | | 401 | | | 402 | | | 403 | | | 404 | | | 405 | | | 406 | | | 407 | | | 408 | | | 410 | | | 413 | | | 414 | | | 415 | | | 416 | | | 420 | | | 421 | | | 423 | | | 480 | | | 481 | | | 482 | | | 483 | | | 484 | | | 485 | | | 486 | | | 487 | | | 488 | | | 491 | | | 493 | | | 500 | | | 501 | | | 502 | | | 503 | | | 504 | | | 505 | | | 513 | | | 600 | | | 603 | | | 604 | | | 606 | | +---------------------+------------------------------+ Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 10] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 5. Security Considerations Detailed security considerations for SIP are given in [SIP] and for XMPP in [XMPP]. 6. References 6.1. Normative References [SIP] 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. [TERMS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [URI] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005. [URL-GUIDE] Hansen, T., Hardie, T., and L. Masinter, "Guidelines and Registration Procedures for New URI Schemes", RFC 4395, February 2006. [XMPP] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 3920, October 2004. 6.2. Informative References [CPIM] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging (CPIM)", RFC 3860, August 2004. [CPP] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)", RFC 3859, August 2004. [IDNA] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3490, March 2003. [RFC2822] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April 2001. [SIP-IM] Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C., and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002. Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 11] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 [SIP-PRES] Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004. [SRV] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, February 2000. [STRINGPREP] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Preparation of Internationalized Strings ("STRINGPREP")", RFC 3454, December 2002. [XEP-0106] Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hildebrand, "JID Escaping", XSF XEP 0106, May 2005. [XMPP-IM] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence", RFC 3921, October 2004. Authors' Addresses Peter Saint-Andre XMPP Standards Foundation P.O. Box 1641 Denver, CO 80201 USA Email: stpeter@jabber.org Avshalom Houri IBM Building 18/D, Kiryat Weizmann Science Park Rehovot 76123 Israel Email: avshalom@il.ibm.com Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 12] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 Joe Hildebrand Jabber, Inc. 1899 Wynkoop Street, Suite 600 Denver, CO 80202 USA Email: jhildebrand@jabber.com Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 13] Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Core January 2008 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). 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, THE IETF TRUST 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 procedures with respect to rights in RFC 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. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA). Saint-Andre, et al. Expires July 7, 2008 [Page 14]