< draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-02.txt		draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-03.txt >
	ECRIT Working Group James Polk		ECRIT Working Group James Polk
	Internet-Draft Cisco Systems		Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
	Expires: September 9, 2009 Mar 9, 2009		Expires: September 24, 2009 Mar 24, 2009
	Intended Status: Standards Track (as PS)		Intended Status: Standards Track (as PS)
	Updates: RFC4412 (if published as an RFC)
	IANA Registering a SIP Resource Priority Header		IANA Registering a SIP Resource Priority Header
	Namespace for Local Emergency Communications		Namespace for Local Emergency Communications
	draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-02		draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-03
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with		This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
	the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain		the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain
	material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made		material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made
	publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s)		publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s)
	controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have		controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have
	granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such		granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such
	material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an		material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an
	skipping to change at page 2, line 7 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 7 ¶
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document creates and IANA registers the new Session Initiation		This document creates and IANA registers the new Session Initiation
	Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header (RPH) namespace "esnet" for		Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header (RPH) namespace "esnet" for
	local emergency usage to a public safety answering point (PSAP),		local emergency usage to a public safety answering point (PSAP),
	between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first responders and their		between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first responders and their
	organizations.		organizations.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Rules of Usage of the Resource Priority Header . . . . . . . 4		2. Rules of Usage of the Resource Priority Header . . . . . . . 4
	3. "esnet" Namespace Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		3. "esnet" Namespace Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	3.1 Namespace Definition Rules and Guidelines . . . . . . . . 6		3.1 Namespace Definition Rules and Guidelines . . . . . . . . 6
	3.2 The "esnet" Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		3.2 The "esnet" Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	4.1 IANA Resource-Priority Namespace Registration . . . . . . 7		4.1 IANA Resource-Priority Namespace Registration . . . . . . 7
	4.2 IANA Priority-Value Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.2 IANA Priority-Value Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	skipping to change at page 3, line 35 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 31 ¶
	It can also be imagined that Voice Service Providers (VSP) directly		It can also be imagined that Voice Service Providers (VSP) directly
	attached to an ESInet can have a trust relationship with the ESInet		attached to an ESInet can have a trust relationship with the ESInet
	such that within these networks, SIP requests (thereby the session		such that within these networks, SIP requests (thereby the session
	they establish) make use of this "esnet" namespace for appropriate		they establish) make use of this "esnet" namespace for appropriate
	treatment.		treatment.
	Usage of the "esnet" namespace is to be defined in a future		Usage of the "esnet" namespace is to be defined in a future
	document(s). This document merely creates the namespace, per the		document(s). This document merely creates the namespace, per the
	rules within [RFC4412], necessitating a Standards Track RFC for		rules within [RFC4412], necessitating a Standards Track RFC for
	IANA registering new RPH namespaces and their relative		IANA registering new RPH namespaces and their relative
	priority-value order. Section 8 of [RFC4412] further states that		priority-value order.
	modifying the order or the number of priority-values to a registered
	namespace SHOULD NOT occur, due to interoperability issues with
	dissimilar implementations.
	There is a possibility that within emergency services networks, a		There is a possibility that within emergency services networks, a
	Multilevel Precedence and Preemption (MLPP)-like behavior can be		Multilevel Precedence and Preemption (MLPP)-like behavior can be
	achieved (likely without the 'preemption' part, which will always be		achieved (likely without the 'preemption' part, which will always be
	a matter of local policy, and not defined here) - ensuring more		a matter of local policy, and not defined here) - ensuring more
	important calls are established or retained, the "esnet" namespace		important calls are established or retained, the "esnet" namespace
	is given 5 priority-levels. MLPP-like SIP signaling is not defined		is given 5 priority-levels. MLPP-like SIP signaling is not defined
	in this document for 911/112/999 style emergency calling, but it is		in this document for 911/112/999 style emergency calling, but it is
	not prevented either.		not prevented either.
	Within the ESINet, there will be emergency calls requiring different		Within the ESINet, there will be emergency calls requiring different
	treatments, according to the type of call. Does a citizen's call to		treatments, according to the type of call. Does a citizen's call to
	a PSAP require the same, a higher or a lower relative priority than		a PSAP require the same, a higher or a lower relative priority than
	skipping to change at page 4, line 16 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 10 ¶
	reminding readers that the rules of RFC 4412 apply - though examples		reminding readers that the rules of RFC 4412 apply - though examples
	of usage are included for completeness. This document IANA		of usage are included for completeness. This document IANA
	registers the "esnet" RPH namespace for use within emergency		registers the "esnet" RPH namespace for use within emergency
	services networks, not just of those from citizens to PSAPs.		services networks, not just of those from citizens to PSAPs.
	2. Rules of Usage of the Resource Priority Header		2. Rules of Usage of the Resource Priority Header
	This document updates the behaviors of the SIP Resource Priority		This document updates the behaviors of the SIP Resource Priority
	header, defined in [RFC4412], during the treatment options		header, defined in [RFC4412], during the treatment options
	surrounding this new "esnet" namespace only. The usage of the		surrounding this new "esnet" namespace only. The usage of the
	"esnet" namespace does not have a normal, or routine call level,		"esnet" namespace does not have a 'normal', or routine call level,
	defined in this document. That is for local jurisdictions to define		given the environment this is to be used within (i.e., within an
	within their respective parts of the ESInet- which could be islands		ESInet). That is for local jurisdictions to define within their
	of local administration.		respective parts of the ESInet- which could be islands of local
			administration.
			RFC4412 states that modifying the relative priority ordering or the
			number of priority-values to a registered namespace is not
			recommended across the same administrative domain, due to
			interoperability issues with dissimilar implementations.
	Every use of this namespace will be in times of an emergency, where		Every use of this namespace will be in times of an emergency, where
	at least one end of the signaling is within a local emergency		at least one end of the signaling is within a local emergency
	organization.		organization.
	The "esnet" namespace has 5 priority-values, in a specified relative		The "esnet" namespace has 5 priority-values, in a specified relative
	priority order, and is a queue-based treatment namespace [RFC4412].		priority order, and is a queue-based treatment namespace [RFC4412].
	Individual jurisdictions MAY configure their SIP entities for		Individual jurisdictions MAY configure their SIP entities for
	preemption treatment, but this is optional, and a local policy		preemption treatment, but this is optional, and a local policy
	decision.		decision.
	skipping to change at page 5, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 49 ¶
	Federal Agency <-------+		Federal Agency <-------+
	Figure 1: Where 'esnet' Namespace Can or Will be used		Figure 1: Where 'esnet' Namespace Can or Will be used
	In Figure 1., the "esnet" namespace is intended for usage within the		In Figure 1., the "esnet" namespace is intended for usage within the
	ESInet on the right side of the diagram. How it is specifically		ESInet on the right side of the diagram. How it is specifically
	utilized is out of scope for this document, and left to local		utilized is out of scope for this document, and left to local
	jurisdictions to define. Adjacent VSPs to the ESInet MAY have a		jurisdictions to define. Adjacent VSPs to the ESInet MAY have a
	trust relationship that includes allowing this/these neighboring		trust relationship that includes allowing this/these neighboring
	VSP(s) to use the "esnet" namespace to differentiate SIP requests		VSP(s) to use the "esnet" namespace to differentiate SIP requests
	and dialogs within the VSP's network. How this namespace is		and dialogs within the VSP's network. The exact mapping between the
	utilized is out of scope for this document. Because the more		internal and external sides of the edge proxy at the ESInet
	important usage of the "esnet" namespace occurs within the ESInet,		boundaries is out of scope of this document.
	the edge proxy, called an Emergency Services Routing Proxy (ESRP)
	can modify or delete this namespace. This is a normative change to
	the allowed behavior within [RFC4412] which only applies to the
	"esnet" namespace, and MUST only be considered valid in this usage
	at the ESInet boundary for this one RP namespace (and associated
	priority-value). The exact mapping between the sides of the ESRP at
	the ESInet boundaries are out of scope of this document.
	To be clear, the use of an edge proxy in any network, the rules		To be clear, the use of an edge proxy in any network, the rules
	within the document that create a (i.e., each) namespace apply, and		within the document that create a (i.e., each) namespace apply, and
	because the "esnet" namespace is allowed to be modified or deleted		because the "esnet" namespace is allowed to be modified or deleted
	at the edge proxy of the ESInet does not allow any edge proxy to		at the edge proxy of the ESInet does not allow any edge proxy to
	modify or delete any other Resource-Priority namespace. This		modify or delete any other Resource-Priority namespace. This
	document's target market is for the "esnet" namespace only.		document's target market is for the "esnet" namespace only.
	3. "esnet" Namespace Definition		3. "esnet" Namespace Definition
	skipping to change at page 7, line 19 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 14 ¶
	(lowest) esnet.0		(lowest) esnet.0
	esnet.1		esnet.1
	esnet.2		esnet.2
	esnet.3		esnet.3
	(highest) esnet.4		(highest) esnet.4
	The "esnet" namespace will be assigned into the priority queuing		The "esnet" namespace will be assigned into the priority queuing
	algorithm (Section 4.5.2 of [RFC4412]) from the public user to the		algorithm (Section 4.5.2 of [RFC4412]) from the public user to the
	PSAP. This does not limit its usage to only the priority queue		PSAP. This does not limit its usage to only the priority queue
	algorithm; meaning the preemption algorithm can be used where the		algorithm; meaning the preemption algorithm is a policy decision for
	local jurisdiction preferred to preempt normal calls in lieu of		local jurisdictions. This document is not RECOMMENDING this
	completing emergency calls. This document is not RECOMMENDING this
	usage, merely pointing out those behaviors is a matter of local		usage, merely pointing out those behaviors is a matter of local
	policy.		policy.
			The rules originated in RFC 4412 remain with regard to an RP actor,
			who understands more than one namespace, MUST maintain its locally
			significant relative priority order.
	NOTE: at this time, there has not been sufficient discussion about		NOTE: at this time, there has not been sufficient discussion about
	whether or not preemption will be used for communications between		whether or not preemption will be used for communications between
	PSAPs or between PSAPs and First responders (and their		PSAPs or between PSAPs and First responders (and their
	organizations).		organizations).
	4. IANA Considerations		4. IANA Considerations
	4.1 IANA Resource-Priority Namespace Registration		4.1 IANA Resource-Priority Namespace Registration
	Within the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" of the sip-parameters		Within the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" of the sip-parameters
	skipping to change at page 8, line 18 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 18 ¶
	here.		here.
	The implications of using this header-value incorrectly can cause a		The implications of using this header-value incorrectly can cause a
	large impact on a network - given that this indication is to give		large impact on a network - given that this indication is to give
	preferential treatment of marked traffic great preference within the		preferential treatment of marked traffic great preference within the
	network than other traffic. This document does not indicate this		network than other traffic. This document does not indicate this
	marking is intended for use by endpoints, yet protections need to be		marking is intended for use by endpoints, yet protections need to be
	taken to prevent granting preferential treatment to unauthorized		taken to prevent granting preferential treatment to unauthorized
	users not calling for emergency help.		users not calling for emergency help.
	A simple means of preventing this usage is to not allow marked		A simple means of preventing this usage into an ESInet is to not
	traffic preferential treatment unless the destination is towards the		allow "esnet" marked traffic to get preferential treatment unless
	local/regional ESInet. 911/112/999 type of calling is fairly local		the destination is towards the local/regional ESInet. This is not a
	in nature, with a finite number of URIs that are considered valid.		consideration for internetwork traffic within the ESInet, or
			generated out of the ESInet. 911/112/999 type of calling is fairly
			local in nature, with a finite number of URIs that are considered
			valid.
	6. Acknowledgements		6. Acknowledgements
	Thanks to Ken Carlberg, Janet Gunn, Fred Baker and Keith Drage for		Thanks to Ken Carlberg, Janet Gunn, Fred Baker and Keith Drage for
	help and encouragement with this effort. Thanks to Henning		help and encouragement with this effort. Thanks to Henning
	Schulzrinne, Ted Hardie, Hannes Tschofenig, Brian Rosen, Janet Gunn		Schulzrinne, Ted Hardie, Hannes Tschofenig, Brian Rosen, Janet Gunn
	and Marc Linsner for constructive comments.		and Marc Linsner for constructive comments.
	7. References		7. References
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	31 lines changed or deleted		31 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/