TOC 
IPTEL WGC. Jennings
Internet-DraftCisco Systems
Intended status: BCPV. Gurbani
Expires: September 26, 2008Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
 March 25, 2008


The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) tel Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Parameter Registry
DOCNAME

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 September 26, 2008.

Abstract

This document creates an Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) registry for tel Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) parameters and their values. It populates the registry with the parameters defined in the tel URI specification, along with the parameters in tel URI extensions defined for number portability and trunk groups.



Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
2.  Terminology
3.  Use of the Registry
4.  IANA Considerations
    4.1.  tel URI Parameters Registry
    4.2.  Registration Policy for tel URI Parameters
5.  Security Considerations
6.  Acknowledgments
7.  References
    7.1.  Normative References
    7.2.  Informative References
§  Authors' Addresses
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements




 TOC 

1.  Introduction

The tel URI [1] (Schulzrinne, H., “The tel URI for Telephone Numbers,” December 2004.), defines a URI that can be used to represent resources identified by telephone numbers. The tel URI, like many other URIs, provides extensibility through the definition of new URI parameters and new values for existing parameters. However, RFC3966 did not specify an IANA registry where such parameters and values can be listed and standardized. This specification creates such a registry.



 TOC 

2.  Terminology

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [2] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.).



 TOC 

3.  Use of the Registry

The tel URI parameters and values for these parameters MUST be documented in a RFC or other permanent and readily available public specification in order to be registered by IANA. This documentation MUST fully explain the syntax, intended usage, and semantics of the parameter. The intent of this requirement is to assure interoperability between independent implementations, and to prevent accidental namespace collisions between implementations of dissimilar features.

RFCs defining tel URI parameters or parameter values MUST register them with IANA as described below.

Some tel URI parameters only accept a set of predefined parameter values while others can take any value. There are also parameters that do not have any value; they are used as flags.

Those URI parameters that take on predefined values typically take on a large number of values. Registering each of those values, or creating a sub-registry for each such parameter is not appropriate. Instead, we have chosen to register URI parameter values by reference. That is, the entry in the URI parameter registry for a given URI parameter contains references to the RFCs defining new values of that parameter.

Accordingly, the tel URI parameter registry contains a column that indicates whether or not each parameter only accepts a set of predefined values. The column can contain "Yes", or "No". A value of "Yes" in the column implies that certain predefined values exist for this parameter and the accompanying RFC or other permanent and readily available public specification should be consulted to find out the accepted set of values. A value of "No" in the column implies that the parameter is used either as a flag, or does not have a set of predefined values. The accompanying RFC or other permanent and readily available public specification should provide more information on the semantics of the parameter.



 TOC 

4.  IANA Considerations

The specification creates a new IANA registry named "tel URI Parameters".



 TOC 

4.1.  tel URI Parameters Registry

New tel URI parameters and new values for existing tel URI parameters MUST be registered by IANA.

When registering a new tel URI parameter the following information MUST be provided:

When registering a new value for an existing tel URI parameter the following information MUST be provided:

Note to IANA editor: When a new value for an existing tel URI parameter is standardized, the Reference column of Table 1 (below) corresponding to the parameter name must be updated to include the new RFC number.

Table 1 contains the initial values for this registry.


Parameter Name     Predefined Values     Reference
--------------     -----------------     ---------
isub               Yes                   [RFC 3966]
isub-encoding      Yes                   [RFC 4715]
ext                Yes                   [RFC 3966]
phone-context      Yes                   [RFC 3966]
enumdi             No                    [RFC 4759]
npdi               No                    [RFC 4694]
rn                 Yes                   [RFC 4694]
rn-context         Yes                   [RFC 4694]
cic                Yes                   [RFC 4694]
cic-context        Yes                   [RFC 4694]
tgrp               Yes                   [RFC 4904]
trunk-context      Yes                   [RFC 4904]

Table 1: IANA tel URI parameter registry



 TOC 

4.2.  Registration Policy for tel URI Parameters

As per the terminology in [6] (Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, “Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs,” March 2008.) and actions accorded to such a role, the registration policy for tel URI parameters shall be "Specification Required, Designated Expert" (the former implicitly implies the latter.)

The Designated Expert when deliberating on whether to include a new parameter in the tel URI registry may use the criteria provided below to reach a decision (this is not an exhaustive list but representative of the issues to consider when rendering an equitable decision):



 TOC 

5.  Security Considerations

The registry in this document does not in itself have security considerations. However, as mentioned in [3] (Mankin, A., Bradner, S., Mahy, R., Willis, D., Ott, J., and B. Rosen, “Change Process for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP),” December 2002.), an important reason for the IETF to manage the extensions of SIP is to ensure that all extensions and parameters are able to provide secure usage. The supporting RFC publications for parameter registrations described this specification MUST provide detailed security considerations for them.



 TOC 

6.  Acknowledgments

The structure of this document comes from [5] (Camarillo, G., “The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Parameter Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP),” December 2004.), which is the equivalent work done in the SIP domain to establish a registry. Ted Hardie, Jon Peterson and Jonathan Rosenberg provided substantive comments that have improved this document.



 TOC 

7.  References



 TOC 

7.1. Normative References

[1] Schulzrinne, H., “The tel URI for Telephone Numbers,” RFC 3966, December 2004 (TXT).
[2] Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).


 TOC 

7.2. Informative References

[3] Mankin, A., Bradner, S., Mahy, R., Willis, D., Ott, J., and B. Rosen, “Change Process for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP),” RFC 3427, December 2002 (TXT).
[4] 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 (TXT).
[5] Camarillo, G., “The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Parameter Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP),” BCP 99, RFC 3969, December 2004 (TXT).
[6] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, “Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs,” draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis-09 (work in progress), March 2008 (TXT).
[7] ITU-T H.323, “H.323: Packet-based multimedia communications systems,” June 2006.
[8] ITU-T Q.764, “Signaling System No. 7: ISDN User Part Signaling Procedures,” December 1999.


 TOC 

Authors' Addresses

  Cullen Jennings
  Cisco Systems
  170 West Tasman Drive
  Mailstop SJC-21/2
  San Jose, CA 95134
  USA
Phone:  +1 408 902-3341
Email:  fluffy@cisco.com
  
  Vijay K. Gurbani
  Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
  2701 Lucent Lane
  Room 9F-546
  Lisle, IL 60532
  USA
Phone:  +1 630 224-0216
Email:  vkg@alcatel-lucent.com


 TOC 

Full Copyright Statement

Intellectual Property