idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 4 characters in excess of 72. -- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too? Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 208 has weird spacing: '...dp-port space...' == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document date (July 4, 2014) is 3583 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'Note' is mentioned on line 500, but not defined ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4288 (Obsoleted by RFC 6838) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4347 (Obsoleted by RFC 6347) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4566 (Obsoleted by RFC 8866) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4572 (Obsoleted by RFC 8122) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4960 (Obsoleted by RFC 9260) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5246 (Obsoleted by RFC 8446) == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps-04 Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 MMUSIC S. Loreto 3 Internet-Draft G. Camarillo 4 Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson 5 Expires: January 5, 2015 July 4, 2014 7 Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)-Based Media Transport in the 8 Session Description Protocol (SDP) 9 draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp-07 11 Abstract 13 SCTP (Stream Control Transmission Protocol) is a transport protocol 14 used to establish associations between two endpoints. This document 15 describes how to express media transport over SCTP in SDP (Session 16 Description Protocol). This document defines the 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' 17 and 'DTLS/SCTP' protocol identifiers for SDP. 19 Status of This Memo 21 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 22 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 24 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 25 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 26 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 27 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 29 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 30 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 31 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 32 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 5, 2015. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 39 document authors. All rights reserved. 41 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 42 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 43 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 44 publication of this document. Please review these documents 45 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 46 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 47 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 48 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 49 described in the Simplified BSD License. 51 Table of Contents 53 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 3. Protocol Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 4. Media Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 57 4.1. Media Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 4.1.1. sctp-port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 59 4.1.2. max-message-size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 5. The Setup and Connection Attributes and Association 61 Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 62 6. Multihoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 63 7. Network Address Translation (NAT) Considerations . . . . . . 8 64 8. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 65 8.1. Actpass/Passive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 66 8.2. Existing Connection Reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 67 8.3. SDP description for SCTP over DTLS Connection . . . . . . 9 68 8.4. SDP description for SCTP over DTLS Connection using 69 default values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 70 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 71 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 72 10.1. sctp-port attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 73 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 74 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 75 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 76 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 77 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 79 1. Introduction 81 SDP (Session Description Protocol) [RFC4566] provides a general- 82 purpose format for describing multimedia sessions in announcements or 83 invitations. TCP-Based Media Transport in the Session Description 84 Protocol (SDP) [RFC4145] specifies a general mechanism for describing 85 and establishing TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) streams. 86 Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the Transport Layer Security 87 (TLS) Protocol in the Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4572] 88 extends RFC4145 [RFC4145] for describing TCP-based media streams that 89 are protected using TLS (Transport Layer Security) [RFC5246]. 91 This document defines three new protocol identifiers: 93 SCTP : to describe SCTP-based [RFC4960] media streams. 95 SCTP/DTLS : to describe media streams transported using the Datagram 96 Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC4347] protocol over SCTP, as 97 specified in [RFC6083]. DTLS over SCTP provides communications 98 privacy for applications that use SCTP as their transport 99 protocol. 101 DTLS/SCTP : to describe media streams transported using SCTP on top 102 of the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol, as 103 defined in [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps]. 105 The authentication certificates are interpreted and validated as 106 defined in RFC4572 [RFC4572]. Self-signed certificates can be used 107 securely, provided that the integrity of the SDP description is 108 assured as defined in RFC4572 [RFC4572]. 110 TLS is designed to run on top of a byte-stream oriented transport 111 protocol providing a reliable, in-sequence delivery like TCP. Since 112 no-one so far has implemented SCTP over TLS, due to some serious 113 limitations described in [RFC6083], this document does not make use 114 of TLS over SCTP as described in RFC3436 [RFC3436]. 116 Additionally, this document specifies the use of the 'setup' and 117 'connection' SDP attributes to establish SCTP associations. These 118 attributes were defined in RFC4145 [RFC4145] for TCP. This document 119 discusses their use with SCTP. 121 2. Terminology 123 In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", 124 "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT 125 RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as 126 described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 [RFC2119] and indicate requirement 127 levels for compliant implementations. 129 3. Protocol Identifier 131 The following is the format for an 'm' line, as specified in RFC4566 132 [RFC4566]: 134 m= ... 136 This document defines three new values for the 'proto' field: 'SCTP', 137 'SCTP/DTLS' and 'DTLS/SCTP'. 139 The 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' and 'DTLS/SCTP' protocol identifiers are 140 similar to both the 'UDP' and 'TCP' protocol identifiers in that they 141 only describe the transport protocol and not the upper-layer 142 protocol. 144 Media described using an 'm' line containing the 'SCTP' protocol 145 identifier are carried using SCTP [RFC4960]. 147 The 'SCTP/DTLS' protocol identifier indicates that the media 148 described will use the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) 149 [RFC4347] over SCTP as specified in [RFC6083]. 151 The 'DTLS/SCTP' protocol identifier indicates that the media 152 described will use SCTP on top of the Datagram Transport Layer 153 Security (DTLS) protocol as specified in 154 [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps]. The actual layer below DTLS can 155 be plain UDP or what ICE agrees on (in the case ICE is used to 156 negotiate the actual transport flow). The lower layer used is 157 identified from the elements present inside the m= line block. 159 An 'm' line that specifies 'SCTP' or 'SCTP/DTLS' or 'DTLS/SCTP' MUST 160 further qualify the application-layer protocol using an fmt 161 identifier. 163 An 'm' line that specifies 'SCTP/DTLS' or 'DTLS/SCTP' MUST provide a 164 certificate fingerprint only if the endpoint supports, and is willing 165 to use, a cipher suite with an associated certificate. An SDP 166 attribute (an 'a' line) is used to transport and exchange end point 167 certificate. The authentication certificates are interpreted and 168 validated as defined in [RFC4572]. 170 4. Media Formats 172 The SDP specification, [RFC4566], states that specifications defining 173 new proto values, like the SCTP, SCTP/DTLS and DTLS/SCTP proto values 174 defined in this RFC, must define the rules by which their media 175 format (fmt) namespace is managed. Use of an existing MIME subtype 176 for the format is encouraged. If no MIME subtype exists, it is 177 RECOMMENDED that a suitable one is registered through the IETF 178 process [RFC4288] [RFC4289] by production of, or reference to, a 179 standards-track RFC that defines the transport protocol for the 180 format. 182 An m-line with of 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' or 'DTLS/SCTP' always 183 describe a single SCTP association. 185 An 'm' line that specifies 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' or 'DTLS/SCTP' MUST 186 further qualify the application-layer protocol using an 'fmt' 187 identifier. 189 The 'fmtp' attribute should be used to map from the 'association- 190 usage' (as used in an "m=" line) to the max-message-size parameter 191 indicating the maximum message size, in bytes, the endpoint is 192 willing to accept. 194 The sctp-port attribute specifies the actual sctp port. 196 m=application 12345 DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 197 a=fmtp:webrtc-datachannel max-message-size=100000 198 a=sctp-port 4060 200 4.1. Media Descriptions 202 An 'm' line containing the 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' or 'DTLS/SCTP' 203 protocol identifier has the following syntax: 205 sctp-m-line = %x6d "=" 206 ("application" space sctp-port space "SCTP" space sctp-fmt CRLF) / 207 ("application" space sctp-port space "SCTP/DTLS" space sctp-fmt CRLF) / 208 ("application" space udp-port space "DTLS/SCTP" space sctp-fmt CRLF) 210 sctp-port = port 212 udp-port = port 214 sctp-fmt = association-usage 216 association-usage = token 218 The media description change slightly depending on the actual 219 . 221 If the sub-field is 'SCTP' or 'SCTP/DTLS', the is 222 the SCTP transport port (sctp-port) and follows the same active/ 223 passive offer/answer model described in Section 4.1 of [RFC4145]. 225 If the sub-field is 'DTLS/SCTP', the is the UDP 226 transport port (udp-port). 228 The sub-field carries the parameter indicating the conventional 229 usage of an entire sctp association (association-usage). 231 association-usage: 232 The association-usage token indicates the conventional usage of an 233 entire sctp association including its streams (e.g. the pairing of 234 certain streams, the protocol carried over certain streams, etc). 236 This parameter is a required parameter. [TBD a value for the 237 generic usage as defined in RFC 4960 [RFC4960]]. 239 Any offered association MAY be rejected in the answer, for any 240 reason. If an association offer is rejected, the offerer and 241 answerer MUST NOT establish an SCTP association for it. To reject an 242 SCTP association, the in the answer MUST be set to zero. 244 4.1.1. sctp-port 246 sctp-port-attr = "a=sctp-port=" portnumber 247 port-number = port 249 The sctp-port attribute specifies the actual sctp port. This 250 attribute is optional and is only meaningful and required if the the 251 sub-field is 'DTLS/SCTP'. If the attribute is not present, 252 the default value is 5000. 254 4.1.2. max-message-size 256 sctpmap-attr = "a=fmtp:" association-usage [max-message-size] 257 max-message-size = "max-message-size" EQUALS 1*DIGIT 259 The 'fmtp' attribute may be used to map from the 'association-usage' 260 (as used in an "m=" line) to the max-message-size parameter 261 indicating the maximum message size, in bytes, the endpoint is 262 willing to accept. 264 The max-message-size parameter indicates the maximum message size, in 265 bytes, the endpoint is willing to accept. The peer should assume 266 that larger message will be rejected by the endpoint, though it is up 267 to the endpoint decide the appropriate behaviour. A parameter with 268 value of '0' will signal a best effort attempt, subject to the 269 current endpoint memory capacity, to handle messages of any size. If 270 the parameter is not present, the implementation should provide a 271 default, with a suggested value of 64K. 273 5. The Setup and Connection Attributes and Association Management 275 The use of the 'setup' and 'connection' attributes in the context of 276 an SCTP association is identical to the use of these attributes in 277 the context of a TCP connection. That is, SCTP endpoints MUST follow 278 the rules in Sections 4 and 5 of RFC 4145 [RFC4145] when it comes to 279 the use of the 'setup' and 'connection' attributes in offer/answer 280 [RFC3264] exchanges. 282 The management of an SCTP association is identical to the management 283 of a TCP connection. That is, SCTP endpoints MUST follow the rules 284 in Section 6 of RFC 4145 [RFC4145] to manage SCTP associations. 285 Whether to use the SCTP ordered or unordered delivery service is up 286 to the applications using the SCTP association. 288 6. Multihoming 290 An SCTP endpoint, unlike a TCP endpoint, can be multihomed. An SCTP 291 endpoint is considered to be multihomed if it has more than one IP 292 address. A multihomed SCTP endpoint informs a remote SCTP endpoint 293 about all its IP addresses using the address parameters of the INIT 294 or the INIT-ACK chunk (depending on whether the multihomed endpoint 295 is the one initiating the establishment of the association). 296 Therefore, once the address provided in the 'c' line has been used to 297 establish the SCTP association (i.e., to send the INIT chunk), 298 address management is performed using SCTP. This means that two SCTP 299 endpoints can use addresses that were not listed in the 'c' line but 300 that were negotiated using SCTP mechanisms. 302 During the lifetime of an SCTP association, the endpoints can add and 303 remove new addresses from the association at any point [RFC5061]. If 304 an endpoint removes the IP address listed in its 'c' line from the 305 SCTP association, the endpoint SHOULD update the 'c' line (e.g., by 306 sending a re-INVITE with a new offer) so that it contains an IP 307 address that is valid within the SCTP association. 309 In some environments, intermediaries performing firewall control use 310 the addresses in offer/answer exchanges to perform media 311 authorization. That is, policy-enforcement network elements do not 312 let media through unless it is sent to the address in the 'c' line. 314 In such network environments, the SCTP endpoints can only exchange 315 media using the IP addresses listed in their 'c' lines. In these 316 environments, an endpoint wishing to use a different address needs to 317 update its 'c' line (e.g., by sending a re-INVITE with a new offer) 318 so that it contains the new IP address. 320 It is worth to underline that when using SCTP on top of DTLS, only 321 single homed SCTP associations can be used, since DTLS does not 322 expose any address management to its upper layer. 324 7. Network Address Translation (NAT) Considerations 326 SCTP specific features (not present in UDP/TCP), such as the checksum 327 (CRC32c) value calculated on the whole packet (not just the header) 328 or its multihoming capabilities, present new challenges for NAT 329 traversal. [I-D.ietf-behave-sctpnat] describes an SCTP specific 330 variant of NAT, which provides similar features of Network Address 331 and Port Translation (NAPT). 333 Current NATs do not typically support SCTP. As an alternative to 334 design SCTP specific NATs, Encapsulating SCTP into UDP [RFC6951] 335 makes it possible to use SCTP in networks with legacy NAT and 336 firewalls not supporting SCTP. 338 At the time of writing, the work on NAT traversal for SCTP is still 339 work in progress. Additionally, no extension has been defined to 340 integrate ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment) [RFC5768] with 341 SCTP and its multihoming capabilities either. Therefore, this 342 specification does not define how to establish and maintain SCTP 343 associations using ICE. Should this feature be specified for SCTP in 344 the future, there will be a need to specify how to use them in an SDP 345 environment as well. 347 8. Examples 349 The following examples show the use of the 'setup' and 'connection' 350 SDP attributes. As discussed in Section 5, the use of these 351 attributes with an SCTP association is identical to their use with a 352 TCP connection. For the purpose of brevity, the main portion of the 353 session description is omitted in the examples, which only show 'm' 354 lines and their attributes (including 'c' lines). 356 8.1. Actpass/Passive 358 An offerer at 192.0.2.2 signals its availability for an SCTP 359 association at SCTP port 54111. Additionally, this offerer is also 360 willing to initiate the SCTP association: 362 m=application 54111 SCTP t38 363 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.2 364 a=setup:actpass 365 a=connection:new 367 Figure 1 369 The endpoint at 192.0.2.1 responds with the following description: 371 m=application 54321 SCTP t38 372 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1 373 a=setup:passive 374 a=connection:new 376 Figure 2 378 This will cause the offerer (at 192.0.2.2) to initiate an SCTP 379 association to port 54321 at 192.0.2.1. 381 8.2. Existing Connection Reuse 383 Subsequent to the exchange in Section 8.1, another offer/answer 384 exchange is initiated in the opposite direction. The endpoint at 385 192.0.2.1, which now acts as the offerer, wishes to continue using 386 the existing association: 388 m=application 54321 SCTP * 389 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1 390 a=setup:passive 391 a=connection:existing 393 Figure 3 395 The endpoint at 192.0.2.2 also wishes to use the existing SCTP 396 association and responds with the following description: 398 m=application 54111 SCTP * 399 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.2 400 a=setup:active 401 a=connection:existing 403 Figure 4 405 The existing SCTP association between 192.0.2.2 and 192.0.2.1 will be 406 reused. 408 8.3. SDP description for SCTP over DTLS Connection 410 This example shows the usage of SCTP over DTLS. 412 An offerer at 192.0.2.2 signals the availability of a webrtc- 413 DataChannel session over SCTP/DTLS. The DTLS connection runs on top 414 of port 54111. The sctp association runs on port 5000 (i.e. sctp- 415 port) over DTLS. The maximum message size, in bytes, the endpoint is 416 willing to accept is 100000 (i.e. max-message-size). 418 m=application 54111 DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 419 a=fmtp:webrtc-datachannel max-message-size=100000 420 a=sctp-port 5000 421 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.2 422 a=setup:actpass 423 a=connection:new 424 a=fingerprint:SHA-1 \ 425 4A:AD:B9:B1:3F:82:18:3B:54:02:12:DF:3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB 427 Figure 5 429 The endpoint at 192.0.2.1 responds with the following description: 431 m=application 62442 DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 432 a=fmtp:webrtc-datachannel max-message-size=100000 433 a=sctp-port 5000 434 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1 435 a=setup:actpass 436 a=connection:new 437 a=fingerprint:SHA-1 \ 438 4A:AD:B9:B1:3F:82:18:3B:54:02:12:DF:3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB 440 Figure 6 442 8.4. SDP description for SCTP over DTLS Connection using default values 444 This example shows the usage of SCTP over DTLS when default values 445 are used. 447 An offerer at 192.0.2.2 signals the availability of a webrtc- 448 DataChannel session over SCTP/DTLS. The DTLS connection runs on top 449 of port 54111. As the sctp association runs on the default sct-port 450 number 5000 over DTLS ant the maximum message size, in bytes, the 451 endpoint is willing to accept is equal to the default value of 64K 452 both the parameters may be omitted. 454 Note that as the sctp association is meant to be used to transport 455 webrtc data channel, the association-usage parameter is present with 456 the webrtc-datachannel value. 458 m=application 54111 DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 459 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.2 460 a=setup:actpass 461 a=connection:new 462 a=fingerprint:SHA-1 \ 463 4A:AD:B9:B1:3F:82:18:3B:54:02:12:DF:3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB 465 Figure 7 467 The endpoint at 192.0.2.1 responds with the following description, 468 with default value for the sctp-port and max-message-size parameters: 470 m=application 62442 DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 471 c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1 472 a=setup:actpass 473 a=connection:new 474 a=fingerprint:SHA-1 \ 475 4A:AD:B9:B1:3F:82:18:3B:54:02:12:DF:3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB 477 Figure 8 479 9. Security Considerations 481 See RFC 4566 [RFC4566] for security considerations on the use of SDP 482 in general. See RFC 3264 [RFC3264], RFC 4145 [RFC4145] and RFC 4572 483 [RFC4572] for security considerations on establishing media streams 484 using offer/answer exchanges. See RFC 4960 [RFC4960] for security 485 considerations on SCTP in general and [RFC6083] for security 486 consideration using DTLS on top of SCTP. This specification does not 487 introduce any new security consideration in addition to the ones 488 discussed in those specifications. 490 10. IANA Considerations 492 This document defines three new proto values: 'SCTP', 'SCTP/DTLS' and 493 'DTLS/SCTP'. Their formats are defined in Section 3. These proto 494 values should be registered by the IANA under "Session Description 495 Protocol (SDP) Parameters" under "proto". 497 The "fmt" value, "association-usage", used with these "proto" is 498 required. It is defined in section Section 4.1. 500 [Note] TBD whether a new registry is necessary to register the 501 different possible "association-usage" values. 503 10.1. sctp-port attribute 505 This document defines a new SDP session and media-level attribute: 507 sctp-port: Its format is define in section Section 4.1.This 508 attribute should be registered by IANA under "Session Description 509 Protocol (SDP) Parameters" under "att-field" (both session and 510 media level)". 512 11. Acknowledgments 514 The authors wish to thank Harald Alvestrand, Randell Jesup, Paul 515 Kyzivat, Michael Tuexen for their comments and useful feedback. 517 12. References 519 12.1. Normative References 521 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 522 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 524 [RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model 525 with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 526 2002. 528 [RFC4145] Yon, D. and G. Camarillo, "TCP-Based Media Transport in 529 the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4145, 530 September 2005. 532 [RFC4288] Freed, N. and J. Klensin, "Media Type Specifications and 533 Registration Procedures", RFC 4288, December 2005. 535 [RFC4289] Freed, N. and J. Klensin, "Multipurpose Internet Mail 536 Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", BCP 537 13, RFC 4289, December 2005. 539 [RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer 540 Security", RFC 4347, April 2006. 542 [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session 543 Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006. 545 [RFC4572] Lennox, J., "Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the 546 Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol in the Session 547 Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4572, July 2006. 549 [RFC4960] Stewart, R., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 550 4960, September 2007. 552 [RFC5061] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., Maruyama, S., and M. 553 Kozuka, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) 554 Dynamic Address Reconfiguration", RFC 5061, September 555 2007. 557 [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security 558 (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008. 560 [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps] 561 Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Jesup, R., and S. Loreto, "DTLS 562 Encapsulation of SCTP Packets", draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp- 563 dtls-encaps-04 (work in progress), May 2014. 565 12.2. Informative References 567 [RFC3436] Jungmaier, A., Rescorla, E., and M. Tuexen, "Transport 568 Layer Security over Stream Control Transmission Protocol", 569 RFC 3436, December 2002. 571 [RFC6083] Tuexen, M., Seggelmann, R., and E. Rescorla, "Datagram 572 Transport Layer Security (DTLS) for Stream Control 573 Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 6083, January 2011. 575 [RFC5768] Rosenberg, J., "Indicating Support for Interactive 576 Connectivity Establishment (ICE) in the Session Initiation 577 Protocol (SIP)", RFC 5768, April 2010. 579 [RFC6951] Tuexen, M. and R. Stewart, "UDP Encapsulation of Stream 580 Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Packets for End-Host 581 to End-Host Communication", RFC 6951, May 2013. 583 [I-D.ietf-behave-sctpnat] 584 Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and I. Ruengeler, "Stream Control 585 Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Network Address Translation", 586 draft-ietf-behave-sctpnat-09 (work in progress), September 587 2013. 589 Authors' Addresses 590 Salvatore Loreto 591 Ericsson 592 Hirsalantie 11 593 Jorvas 02420 594 Finland 596 Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com 598 Gonzalo Camarillo 599 Ericsson 600 Hirsalantie 11 601 Jorvas 02420 602 Finland 604 Email: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com