ENUM -- Telephone Number Mapping J. Livingood Working Group Comcast Internet-Draft B. Hoeneisen Expires: August 28, 2006 Switch Feb 24, 2006 Guide and Template for IANA Registrations of Enumervices draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide-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 August 28, 2006. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Abstract This document provides a guide to and template for the creation of new IANA registration of ENUM services. It is also to be used for updates of existing IANA registrations. Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 1] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 Table of Contents 1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Required Sections and Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Introduction (MANDATORY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2. Enumservice Registration for "foo" with Subtype "bar" (MANDATORY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.3. Examples (MANDATORY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.4. Implementation Recommendations / Notes (OPTIONAL) . . . . 4 3.5. Security Considerations (MANDATORY) . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.6. IANA Considerations (MANDATORY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.7. Other Sections (OPTIONAL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Blank Enumservice Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Revision of Pre-Existing Enumservice RFCs . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix A. XML2RFC Template for Enumservice Registration . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12 Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 2] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 1. 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 RFC 2119 [1]. 2. Introduction This document provides a guide to and template for the creation of new IANA registrations of Enumservices. This document aims to enhance section 3 of RFC 3761 [2], where the registration procedure for Enumservices was initially documented at a high level. However, the IETF's ENUM Working Group has encountered an unnecessary amount of variation in the format of Enumservice drafts presented to the group. The ENUM Working Group's view of what particular fields and information are required and/or recommended has also evolved, and capturing these best current practices is helpful in both the creation of new registrations, as well as the revision or refinement of existing registrations. [-00 Note: This is an early draft version.] 3. Required Sections and Information In addition to the typical sections required for an RFC as outlined in RFC 2223bis [3] (Instructions to RFC Authors), there are several sections which MUST appear in an IANA Registration for an Enumservice. These sections are, as follows, and SHOULD be in the following order: 3.1. Introduction (MANDATORY) An introductory section MUST be included. This section will explain, in plain English, the purpose of and intended usage of the proposed Enumservice registration. 3.2. Enumservice Registration for "foo" with Subtype "bar" (MANDATORY) This section MUST be included in an Enumservice registration. In addition, where a given registration type has multiple subtypes, there MUST be a separate registration section for each subtype. The following lists the sections and order of an Enumservice Registration section. All types and subtypes SHOULD be listed in lower-case. Enumservice Name: "foo" Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 3] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 Enumservice Type: "foo" Enumservice Subtype: "bar" URI Schemes: "bar:" Functional Specification: This Enumservice indicates that the remote resource identified can be addressed by the associated URI scheme in order to foo the bar. Security Considerations: See Section Section 3.5 (a reference internal to a given registration document). Intended Usage: COMMON [-00 Note: Authors to explain the choices here in a later revision.] Authors: Madeline Smith and Katie Jones (for author contact detail see Authors' Addresses section). Any other information the author deems interesting: None 3.3. Examples (MANDATORY) This section MUST show one or more example(s) of the Enumservice registration, for illustrative purposes. The example(s) shall in no way limit the various forms that a given Enumservice may take and this should be noted at the beginning of this section of the document. The example(s) MUST show the specific formatting of the intended NAPTRs [4], including one or more NAPTR example(s), AND a brief textual description, consisting of one or more sentences written in plain English, explaining the various parts or attributes of the record. 3.4. Implementation Recommendations / Notes (OPTIONAL) If at all possible, recommendations that pertain to implemention and/or operations SHOULD be included. Such a section is helpful to someone reading a registration and trying to understand how best to use it to support their network or service. Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 4] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 3.5. Security Considerations (MANDATORY) A section explaining any potential security threats that are unique to the given registration MUST be included. This MUST also include any information about access to Personally Identifiable Information (PII). However, this section should not intended as a general security Best Current Practices (BCP) document or include general and obvious security recommendations, such as securing servers with strong password authentication. 3.6. IANA Considerations (MANDATORY) [-00 Note: Will be exapanded in an upcoming revision.] 3.7. Other Sections (OPTIONAL) Other sections, beyond those required by the IETF and/or IANA, which are cited or otherwise referenced here, MAY be included in an Enumservice registration. These sections may relate to the specifics of the intended usage of the Enumservice registration and associated technical, operational, or administrative concerns. 4. Blank Enumservice Template Appendix A contains a template which can be used to create Internet Drafts and RFC by means described on http://xml.resource.org/. 5. Revision of Pre-Existing Enumservice RFCs Several Enumservice registrations, published via IETF RFCs, already exist at the time of the development of this document. The authors recommend that these existing registration documents SHOULD be reviewed and, where necessary and appropriate, MAY be revised in accordance with the recommendations contained herein. All future Enumservice registrations SHOULD follow the recommendations contained herein, where practical and applicable. 6. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Alexander Mayrhofer for his review and feedback. Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 5] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 7. Normative References [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [2] Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004. [3] Reynolds, J. and R. Braden, "Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors", draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-08 (work in progress), July 2004. [4] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database", RFC 3403, October 2002. Appendix A. XML2RFC Template for Enumservice Registration IANA Registration for Enumservice Foo MyOrganization
MyAddress MyCity MyZIP MyCountry Myphonenumber Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 6] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 MyEmailAddress MyWebpage
RAI ENUM -- Telephone Number Mapping Working Group ENUM foo bar This memo registers the Enumservice "foo" with subtype "bar" using the URI scheme "bar" according to the IANA Enumservice registration process described in RFC3671. This Enumservice is to be used to refer from an ENUM domain name to the foobar of the entity using the corresponding E.164 number. Clients may use information gathered from those ...
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 . ENUM uses the Domain Name System (DNS) for mapping E.164 numbers to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). E.164 numbers are converted to ENUM domain names through means described further in RFC3761. Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 7] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 Describe service and stuff here...
Enumservice Name: "foo" Enumservice Type: "foo" Enumservice Subtypes: "bar" URI Schemes: "bar" Functional Specification: This Enumservice indicates that ... Security Considerations: see Intended Usage: COMMON Author(s): MyName MySurname (see 'Authors' section for contact details)
An example ENUM entry referencing to "foo" could look like: $ORIGIN 0.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.1.4.e164.arpa. @ IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "E2U+foo" "!^.*$!bar://example.com/!" . Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 8] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 ...
...
Since ENUM uses DNS - a publicly available database - any information contained in records provisioned in ENUM domains must be considered public as well. Even after revoking the DNS entry and removing the refered resource, copies of the information could still be available. Information published in ENUM records could reveal associations between E.164 numbers and their owners - especially if records contain personal identifiers or domain names for which ownership information can easily be obtained. ...
This memo requests registration of the "foo" Enumservice subtype "bar" according to the definitions in this document and RFC3761. ...
Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 9] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006
The international public telecommunication numbering plan ITU-T
Figure 1 Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 10] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 Authors' Addresses Jason Livingood Comcast Cable Communications 1500 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 USA Phone: +1-215-981-7813 Email: jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com URI: http://www.comcast.com/ Bernie Hoeneisen Switch Neumuehlequai 6 CH-8001 Zuerich Switzerland Phone: +41 44 268 1515 Email: hoeneisen@switch.ch, b.hoeneisen@ieee.org URI: http://www.switch.ch/ Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 11] Internet-Draft BCP Enumservice Registrations Feb 2006 Intellectual Property Statement 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. Disclaimer of Validity 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 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. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). 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. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Livingood & Hoeneisen Expires August 28, 2006 [Page 12]