< draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-03.txt		draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-04.txt >
	ECRIT Working Group James Polk		ECRIT Working Group James Polk
	Internet-Draft Cisco Systems		Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
	Expires: September 24, 2009 Mar 24, 2009		Expires: September 7, 2010 March 7, 2010
	Intended Status: Standards Track (as PS)		Intended Status: Standards Track
	IANA Registering a SIP Resource Priority Header		IANA Registering a SIP Resource Priority Header Field
	Namespace for Local Emergency Communications		Namespace for Local Emergency Communications
	draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-03		draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-04
			Abstract
			This document creates the new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
			Resource Priority header field namespace "esnet" for local emergency
			usage to a public safety answering point (PSAP), between PSAPs, and
			between a PSAP and first responders and their organizations, and
			places this namespace in the IANA registry.
	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.
	material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made
	publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s)
	controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have
	granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such
	material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an
	adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in
	such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF
	Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created
	outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for
	publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than
	English.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that		Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
	other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-		other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
	Drafts.		Drafts.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
	months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents		months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
	at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as		at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
	reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 2009.		This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2010.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	rights and restrictions with respect to this document.		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
			respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
	Legal		document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
			Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
	This documents and the information contained therein are provided on		warranty as described in the BSD License.
	an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
	REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE
	IETF TRUST 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 THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE
	ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
	FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
	Abstract
	This document creates and IANA registers the new Session Initiation
	Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header (RPH) namespace "esnet" for
	local emergency usage to a public safety answering point (PSAP),
	between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first responders and their
	organizations.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 29 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 29 ¶
	7.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		7.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
	NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and		NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
	"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described		"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described
	in [RFC2119].		in [RFC2119].
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	This document creates and IANA registers the new Session Initiation		This document creates the new Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
	Protocol (SIP) Resource Priority header (RPH) namespace "esnet" for		Resource Priority header field namespace "esnet" for local emergency
	local emergency usage. The SIP Resource-Priority header is defined		usage and places this namespace in the IANA registry. The SIP
	in RFC 4412 [RFC4412]. This new namespace is to be used within		Resource-Priority header field is defined in RFC 4412 [RFC4412].
	public safety answering point (PSAP) networks. This new namespace		This new namespace is to be used within public safety answering
	can be used for inbound calls towards PSAPs, between PSAPs, and		point (PSAP) networks. This new namespace can be used for inbound
	between a PSAP and first responders or their organizations.		calls towards PSAPs, between PSAPs, and between a PSAP and first
			responders or their organizations.
	Within controlled environments, such as an IMS infrastructure or		Within controlled environments, such as an IMS infrastructure or
	Emergency Services network (ESInet), where misuse can be reduced to		Emergency Services network (ESInet), where misuse can be reduced to
	a minimum because these types of networks have great controls in		a minimum because these types of networks have great controls in
	place, this namespace can be to provide an explicit priority		place, this namespace can be to provide an explicit priority
	indication that facilitates differing treatment of emergency SIP		indication that facilitates differing treatment of emergency SIP
	messages according to local policy, or more likely, a contractual		messages according to local policy, or more likely, a contractual
	agreement between the network organizations. This indication is		agreement between the network organizations. This indication is
	used to differentiate SIP requests, or dialogs, from other requests		used solely to differentiate SIP requests, transactions or dialogs,
	or dialogs that do not have the need for priority treatment.		from other requests, transactions or dialogs that do not have the
			need for priority treatment. If there are differing, yet still
			valid Resource-Priority header values between SIP requests in a
			network, then this indication can be used by local policy to
			determine which SIP request, transaction or dialog receives which
			treatment (likely better or worse than another).
	It can also be imagined that Voice Service Providers (VSP) directly		It can also be imagined that Application Service Providers (ASP)
	attached to an ESInet can have a trust relationship with the ESInet		directly attached to an ESInet can have a trust relationship with
	such that within these networks, SIP requests (thereby the session		the ESInet such that within these networks, SIP requests (thereby
	they establish) make use of this "esnet" namespace for appropriate		the session they establish) make use of this "esnet" namespace for
	treatment.		appropriate treatment.
	Usage of the "esnet" namespace is to be defined in a future		This document merely creates the namespace, per the rules within
	document(s). This document merely creates the namespace, per the		[RFC4412], necessitating a Standards Track RFC for IANA registering
	rules within [RFC4412], necessitating a Standards Track RFC for		new RPH namespaces and their relative priority-value order.
	IANA registering new RPH namespaces and their relative
	priority-value order.
	There is a possibility that within emergency services networks, a		There is the possibility that within emergency services networks -
	Multilevel Precedence and Preemption (MLPP)-like behavior can be		provided local policy supports enabling this function - a Multilevel
	achieved (likely without the 'preemption' part, which will always be		Precedence and Preemption (MLPP)-like behavior can be achieved
	a matter of local policy, and not defined here) - ensuring more		(likely without the 'preemption' part, which will always be a matter
	important calls are established or retained, the "esnet" namespace		of local policy, and defined here) - ensuring more important calls
	is given 5 priority-levels. MLPP-like SIP signaling is not defined		are established or retained, the "esnet" namespace is given 5
	in this document for 911/112/999 style emergency calling, but it is		priority-levels. MLPP-like SIP signaling is not defined in this
	not prevented either.		document for 911/112/999 style emergency calling, but it is 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
	a PSAP's call to a police department, or the police chief? What		a PSAP's call to a police department, or the police chief? What
	about either relative to a call from within the ESINet to a		about either relative to a call from within the ESINet to a
	federal government's department of national security, such as the US		federal government's department of national security, such as the US
	Department of Homeland Security? For this reason, the "esnet"		Department of Homeland Security? For this reason, the "esnet"
	namespace is given multiple priority levels.		namespace is given multiple priority levels.
	This document does not define any of these behaviors, outside of		This document does not define any of these behaviors, outside of
	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 field
	This document updates the behaviors of the SIP Resource Priority		This document retains the behaviors of the SIP Resource Priority
	header, defined in [RFC4412], during the treatment options		header field, defined in [RFC4412], during the treatment options
	surrounding this new "esnet" namespace only. The usage of the		surrounding this new "esnet" namespace. The usage of the "esnet"
	"esnet" namespace does not have a 'normal', or routine call level,		namespace does not have a 'normal', or routine call level, given the
	given the environment this is to be used within (i.e., within an		environment this is to be used within (i.e., within an ESInet).
	ESInet). That is for local jurisdictions to define within their		That is for local jurisdictions to define within their respective
	respective parts of the ESInet- which could be islands of local		parts of the ESInet- which could be islands of local administration.
	administration.
	RFC4412 states that modifying the relative priority ordering or the		RFC 4412 states that modifying the relative priority ordering or the
	number of priority-values to a registered namespace is not		number of priority-values to a registered namespace is not
	recommended across the same administrative domain, due to		recommended across the same administrative domain, due to
	interoperability issues with dissimilar implementations.		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. This is OPTIONAL, subject to local policy
	decision.		decisions.
	Conceivably, this could be an example network diagram where the		Conceivably, this could be an example network diagram where the
	"esnet" namespace is used:		"esnet" namespace is used:
	|<-"esnet" namespace->|		|<-"esnet" namespace->|
	| *WILL* be used |		| *WILL* be used |
	"esnet" namespace | ,-------.		"esnet" namespace | ,-------.
	usage out of scope | ,' `.		usage out of scope | ,' `.
	|<------------>|<---"esnet" namespace ---->| / \		|<------------>|<---"esnet" namespace ---->| / \
	+----+ | can be used +-----+ | ESINet |		+----+ | can be used +-----+ | ESINet |
	skipping to change at page 5, line 39 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 49 ¶
	\ / \ / | | +------+ |		\ / \ / | | +------+ |
	+----+ /`. ,' `. .+-----+ | |		+----+ /`. ,' `. .+-----+ | |
	| UA |---- '-------' '-------' |Proxy|-+ ANY can |		| UA |---- '-------' '-------' |Proxy|-+ ANY can |
	+----+ | +-----+ | xfer/call |		+----+ | +-----+ | xfer/call |
	| | \ | | | /		| | \ | | | /
	`. | | | ,'		`. | | | ,'
	'-|-|-|-'		'-|-|-|-'
	| | |		| | |
	Police <--------------+ | |		Police <--------------+ | |
	Fire <----------+ |		Fire <----------+ |
	Federal Agency <-------+		to a 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 ASPs 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		ASP(s) to use the "esnet" namespace to differentiate SIP requests
	and dialogs within the VSP's network. The exact mapping between the		and dialogs within the ASP's network. The exact mapping between the
	internal and external sides of the edge proxy at the ESInet		internal and external sides of the edge proxy at the ESInet
	boundaries is out of scope of this document.		boundaries is out of scope of this document.
	To be clear, the use of an edge proxy in any network, the rules		To be clear, specifically for the use of an edge proxy in any
	within the document that create a (i.e., each) namespace apply, and		network, because the "esnet" namespace is allowed to be modified or
	because the "esnet" namespace is allowed to be modified or deleted		deleted at the edge proxy of the ESInet does not allow any edge
	at the edge proxy of the ESInet does not allow any edge proxy to		proxy to modify or delete any other Resource-Priority namespace.
	modify or delete any other Resource-Priority namespace. This		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
	One thing to keep in mind for now is the fact that this namespace		One thing to keep in mind for now is the fact that this namespace
	is not to be considered just "EMERGENCY" because there are a lot of		is not to be considered just "EMERGENCY" because there are a lot of
	different kinds of emergencies, some on a military scale ([RFC4412]		different kinds of emergencies, some on a military scale ([RFC4412]
	defines 3 of these), some on a national scale ([RFC4412] defines 2		defines 3 of these), some on a national scale ([RFC4412] defines 2
	of these), some on an international scale. These types of		of these), some on an international scale. These types of
	emergencies can also have their own namespaces, and although there		emergencies can also have their own namespaces, and although there
	are 5 defined for other uses, more are possible - so the 911/112/999		are 45 defined for other uses, more are possible - so the
	style of public user emergency calling for police or fire or		911/112/999 style of public user emergency calling for police or
	ambulance (etc) does not have a monopoly on the word "emergency".		fire or ambulance (etc) does not have a monopoly on the word
			"emergency".
	Therefore, the namespace "esnet" has been chosen, as it is most		The namespace "esnet" has been chosen - roughly to stand for
	recognizable as that of citizen's call for help from a public		"Emergency Services NETwork", as it is most recognizable as that of
	authority type of organization. This namespace will also be used		citizen's call for help from a public authority type of
	for communications between emergency authorities, and MAY be used		organization. This namespace will also be used for communications
	for emergency authorities calling public citizens. An example of		between emergency authorities, and MAY be used for emergency
	the later is a PSAP operator calling back someone who previously		authorities calling public citizens. An example of the later is a
	called 9111/112/999 and the communication was terminated before it		PSAP operator calling back someone who previously called 911/112/999
	should have been (in the operator's judgment).		and the communication was terminated before it - in the PSAP
			operator's judgment - should have been.
	Here is an example of a Resource-Priority header using the esnet		Here is an example of a Resource-Priority header field using the
	namespace:		"esnet" namespace:
	Resource-Priority: esnet.0		Resource-Priority: esnet.0
	3.1. Namespace Definition Rules and Guidelines		3.1. Namespace Definition Rules and Guidelines
	This specification defines one unique namespace for emergency		This specification defines one unique namespace for emergency
	calling scenarios, "esnet", constituting its registration with IANA.		calling scenarios, "esnet", constituting its registration with IANA.
	This IANA registration contains the facets defined in Section 9 of		This IANA registration contains the facets defined in Section 9 of
	[RFC4412].		[RFC4412].
	3.2. The "esnet" Namespace		3.2. The "esnet" Namespace
	Per the rules of [RFC4412], each namespace has a finite set of		Per the rules of [RFC4412], each namespace has a finite set of
	relative priority-value(s), listed (below) from lowest priority to		relative priority-value(s), listed (below) from lowest priority to
	highest priority. In an attempt to not limit this namespace's use		highest priority. In an attempt to not limit this namespace's use
	in the future, more than one priority-value is assigned to the		in the future, more than one priority-value is assigned to the
	"esnet" namespace. This document does not RECOMMEND which		"esnet" namespace. This document does NOT RECOMMEND which
	priority-value is used where. That is for another document to		priority-value is used where. That is for another document to
	specify. This document does RECOMMEND the choice within a national		specify. This document does RECOMMEND the choice within a national
	jurisdiction is coordinated by all sub-jurisdictions to maintain		jurisdiction is coordinated by all sub-jurisdictions to maintain
	uniform SIP behavior throughout an emergency calling system.		uniform SIP behavior throughout an emergency calling system of that
			country.
	The relative priority order for the "esnet" namespace is as follows:		The relative priority order for the "esnet" namespace is as follows:
	(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
	skipping to change at page 7, line 23 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 34 ¶
	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 is a policy decision for		algorithm; meaning the preemption algorithm is a policy decision for
	local jurisdictions. This document is not RECOMMENDING this		local jurisdictions. 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,		The rules originated in RFC 4412 remain with regard to an RP actor,
	who understands more than one namespace, MUST maintain its locally		who understands more than one namespace, MUST maintain its locally
	significant relative priority order.		significant relative priority order.
	NOTE: at this time, there has not been sufficient discussion about
	whether or not preemption will be used for communications between
	PSAPs or between PSAPs and First responders (and their
	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
	section of IANA (created by [RFC4412]), the following entries will		section of IANA (created by [RFC4412]), the following entries will
	be added to this table:		be added to this table:
	Intended New warn- New resp.		Intended New warn- New resp.
	Namespace Levels Algorithm code code Reference		Namespace Levels Algorithm code code Reference
	skipping to change at page 8, line 10 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 12 ¶
	Namespace: esnet		Namespace: esnet
	Reference: (this document)		Reference: (this document)
	Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "1","2", "3", "4"		Priority-Values (least to greatest): "0", "1","2", "3", "4"
	5. Security Considerations		5. Security Considerations
	The Security considerations that apply to RFC 4412 [RFC4412] apply		The Security considerations that apply to RFC 4412 [RFC4412] apply
	here.		here.
	The implications of using this header-value incorrectly can cause a		The implications of using this namespace within the
	large impact on a network - given that this indication is to give		Resource-Priority header field incorrectly can cause a large impact
	preferential treatment of marked traffic great preference within the		on a network - given that this indication is to give preferential
	network than other traffic. This document does not indicate this		treatment of marked traffic great preference within the network than
	marking is intended for use by endpoints, yet protections need to be		other traffic. This document does not indicate this marking is
	taken to prevent granting preferential treatment to unauthorized		intended for use by endpoints, yet protections need to be taken to
	users not calling for emergency help.		prevent granting preferential treatment to unauthorized users not
			calling for emergency help.
	A simple means of preventing this usage into an ESInet is to not		A simple means of preventing this usage into an ESInet is to not
	allow "esnet" marked traffic to get preferential treatment unless		allow "esnet" marked traffic to get preferential treatment unless
	the destination is towards the local/regional ESInet. This is not a		the destination is towards the local/regional ESInet. This is not a
	consideration for internetwork traffic within the ESInet, or		consideration for internetwork traffic within the ESInet, or
	generated out of the ESInet. 911/112/999 type of calling is fairly		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		local in nature, with a finite number of URIs that are considered
	valid.		valid.
	6. Acknowledgements		6. Acknowledgements
End of changes. 27 change blocks.
	117 lines changed or deleted		101 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/