Signaling Transport (sigtran) Charter

Signaling Transport (sigtran)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the . It may now be out-of-date.

Last Modified: 2006-03-24

Chair(s):

Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Director(s):

Jon Peterson <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>

* The Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Directors were seated during the IETF 65.

Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Advisor:

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>

Technical Advisor(s):

Shawn Routhier <sar@epilogue.com>

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion: sigtran@ietf.org
To Subscribe: sigtran-request@ietf.org
In Body: subscribe email_address
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sigtran/index.html

Description of Working Group:

The primary purpose of this working group will be to address the
transport of packet-based PSTN signaling over IP Networks, taking into
account functional and performance requirements of the PSTN signaling.

For interworking with PSTN, IP networks will need to transport
signaling
such as Q.931 or SS7 ISUP messages between IP nodes such as a
Signaling
Gateway and Media Gateway Controller or Media Gateway.

Examples of such transport include:

- transport of signaling between a Signaling Gateway and Media
Gateway
or Media Gateway Controller
- transport of signaling ("backhaul") from a Media Gateway to a Media
Gateway Controller
- transport of TCAP between a Signaling Gateway and other IP nodes

Applications include:

- Internet dial-up remote access
- IP telephony interworking with PSTN
- Other services as identified

Specific goals are:

1. Architecture and Performance Requirements: The working group will
produce an informational RFC identifying functionality and
performance requirements to support signaling over IP. Signaling
messages have very stringent loss and delay requirements in the
existing telephone networks that need to be supported.

2- Transport: The working group will produce a standards track
proposal or proposals defining transport of signaling protocols
using SCTP, based on the requirements identified above.

These proposals will identify the method of encapsulation of different
signaling protocols. This will include differentiating between
different protocols being carried, and what components are
transported,
translated or terminated at the SG. Security and resilience must be
addressed.

Note: TCAP is a transaction protocol with different functions and
requirements than call control signaling. This will need to be
taken into account in its mapping to IP networks.

This work will be done in conjunction with other IETF working
groups looking at similar issues. The working group will also
ensure that good information conduits exist with groups in other
standards groups with expertise in the relevant signaling
protocols or in the network requirements for the transport of
the
relevant signaling protocols.

The group will make use of existing IETF QoS and security technology
and
will not address creation of new QoS or security functions for IP
networks. Nor will the working group work on defining new call control
or device control protocols.

Goals and Milestones:

Done		Submit Initial draft of Signaling Architecture and Performance Requirements document as an Internet-Draft
Done		Issue initial IDs on Transport Layer Protocols and Encapsulation of Signaling Protocols
Done		Submit requirements document to IESG for publication as an RFC
Done		Submit revised version of drafts incorporating discussions and early implementation experience.
Done		Submit IP-based transport protocol draft to IESG for publication as a Standards-track RFC
Done		Submit initial adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard
Done		Submit protocol Applicability Statements draft to IESG for consideration as an Informationl RFC
Done		Submit protocol MIB draft to IESG for consideration as an Proposed Standard
Done		Submit security framework to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
Done		Resubmit updated IUA specification to IESG for consideration as proposed standard
Done		Submit remaining adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard
Mar 2004		Submit implementation guidelines and other extensions based on testing to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard

No Current Internet-Drafts

Request For Comments:

RFC	Status	Title
RFC2719	I	Architectural Framework for Signaling Transport
RFC2960	PS	Stream Control Transmission Protocol
RFC3057	PS	ISDN Q.921-User Adaptation Layer
RFC3257	I	Stream Control Transmission Protocol Applicability Statement
RFC3331	PS	Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part (MTP)2 - User Adaption Layer
RFC3332	PS	SS7 MTP3-User Adaptation Layer (M3UA)
RFC3788	Standard	Security Considerations for SIGTRAN Protocols
RFC3807	Standard	V5.2-User Adaption Layer (V5UA)
RFC3868	Standard	Signalling Connection Control Part User Adaptation Layer (SUA)
RFC3873	Standard	Stream Control Transmission Protocol Management Information Base
RFC4129	Standard	Digital Private Network Signaling System (DPNSS)/Digital Access Signaling System 2 (DASS 2) Extensions to the IUA protocol
RFC4165	Standard	Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP2) - User Peer-to-Peer Adaptation Layer (M2PA)
RFC4166	I	Telephony Signalling Transport over Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Applicability
RFC4233	Standard	Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) Q.921-User Adaptation Layer
RFC4666	PS	Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 3 (MTP3) - User Adaptation Layer (M3UA)
RFC5133	PS	Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI) Query Request Number Change