| < draft-tschofenig-dime-diameter-qos-00.txt | draft-tschofenig-dime-diameter-qos-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diameter Maintanence and F. Alfano | Diameter Maintanence and F. Alfano | |||
| Extensions (DIME) P. McCann | Extensions (DIME) P. McCann | |||
| Internet-Draft Lucent Technologies | Internet-Draft Lucent Technologies | |||
| Expires: September 1, 2006 H. Tschofenig | Intended status: Informational H. Tschofenig | |||
| Siemens | Expires: April 23, 2007 Siemens | |||
| T. Tsenov | T. Tsenov | |||
| February 28, 2006 | T. Tsou | |||
| October 20, 2006 | ||||
| Diameter Quality of Service Application | Diameter Quality of Service Application | |||
| draft-tschofenig-dime-diameter-qos-00.txt | draft-tschofenig-dime-diameter-qos-01.txt | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any | By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any | |||
| applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware | 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 | 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. | aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. | |||
| 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶ | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | 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 1, 2006. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 23, 2007. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes a Diameter application that performs | This document describes a Diameter application that performs | |||
| Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting for Quality of Service | Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting for Quality of Service | |||
| (QoS) reservations. This protocol is used by elements along the path | (QoS) reservations. This protocol is used by elements along the path | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 12 ¶ | |||
| the network, allowing for a wide variety of flexible deployment | the network, allowing for a wide variety of flexible deployment | |||
| models. | models. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3. Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3. Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 3.1. Network element functional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.1. Network element functional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.2. Authorization models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.2. Authorization models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.3. QoS authorization considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.3. QoS authorization considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 4. Diameter QoS Authorization session establishment and | 4. Diameter QoS Authorization session establishment and | |||
| management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 4.1. Parties involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 4.1. Parties involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 4.2. Initial QoS authorization (Diameter QoS authorization | 4.2. Initial QoS authorization (Diameter QoS authorization | |||
| session establishment) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | session establishment) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 4.3. QoS authorization session re-authorization . . . . . . . . 20 | 4.3. QoS authorization session re-authorization . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 4.3.1. Client-side initiated Re-Authorization . . . . . . . . 20 | 4.3.1. Client-side initiated Re-Authorization . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 4.3.2. Server-side initiated Re-Authorization . . . . . . . . 21 | 4.3.2. Server-side initiated Re-Authorization . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| 4.4. Server-side initiated QoS parameter provisioning . . . . . 22 | 4.4. Server-side initiated QoS parameter provisioning . . . . . 24 | |||
| 4.5. Session Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 4.5. Session Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 4.5.1. Client-side initiated session termination . . . . . . 23 | 4.5.1. Client-side initiated session termination . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 4.5.2. Server-side initiated session termination . . . . . . 24 | 4.5.2. Server-side initiated session termination . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 5. Accounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 5. Accounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
| 6. Diameter QoS authorization application Messages . . . . . . . 28 | 6. Diameter QoS authorization application Messages . . . . . . . 30 | |||
| 6.1. QoS-Authorization Request (QAR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 6.1. QoS-Authorization Request (QAR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | |||
| 6.2. QoS-Authorization Answer (QAA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 6.2. QoS-Authorization Answer (QAA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | |||
| 6.3. QoS-Install Request (QIR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 6.3. QoS-Install Request (QIR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | |||
| 6.4. QoS-Install Answer (QAA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | 6.4. QoS-Install Answer (QIA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | |||
| 6.5. Accounting Request (ACR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | 6.5. Accounting Request (ACR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | |||
| 6.6. Accounting Answer (ACA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | 6.6. Accounting Answer (ACA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | |||
| 7. Diameter QoS Authorization Application AVPs . . . . . . . . . 33 | 7. Diameter QoS Authorization Application AVPs . . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
| 7.1. Diameter Base Protocol AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | 7.1. Diameter Base Protocol AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
| 7.2. Credit Control application AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | 7.2. Credit Control application AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
| 7.3. Accounting AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | 7.3. Accounting AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | |||
| 7.4. Diameter QoS Application Defined AVPs . . . . . . . . . . 35 | 7.4. Diameter QoS Application Defined AVPs . . . . . . . . . . 37 | |||
| 8. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | 8. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 | |||
| 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 | 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 | |||
| 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 | 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 | |||
| 11. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 | 11. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 | |||
| 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 | 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 | |||
| 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 | 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 | |||
| 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 | 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 | |||
| Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 49 | Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 51 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| To meet the Quality of Service needs of applications such as Voice- | To meet the Quality of Service needs of applications such as Voice- | |||
| over-IP in a heavily loaded network, packets belonging to real-time | over-IP in a heavily loaded network, packets belonging to real-time | |||
| application flows must be identified and segregated from other | application flows must be identified and segregated from other | |||
| traffic to ensure that bandwidth, delay, and loss rate requirements | traffic to ensure that bandwidth, delay, and loss rate requirements | |||
| are met. In addition, new flows should not be added to the network | are met. In addition, new flows should not be added to the network | |||
| when it is at or near capacity, which would result in degradation of | when it is at or near capacity, which would result in degradation of | |||
| quality for all flows carried by the network. | quality for all flows carried by the network. | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 33 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 33 ¶ | |||
| || || | || || | |||
| \\\\ //// | \\\\ //// | |||
| \-------+-----/ | \-------+-----/ | |||
| | | | | |||
| +---+--+ +-----+----+ +---+--+ | +---+--+ +-----+----+ +---+--+ | |||
| | | | NE | | | Application | | | | NE | | | Application | |||
| + NE +===+(Diameter +===+ NE +=============>> | + NE +===+(Diameter +===+ NE +=============>> | |||
| | | | Client) | | | Flow | | | | Client) | | | Flow | |||
| +------+ +----------+ +------+ | +------+ +----------+ +------+ | |||
| Figure 1: An Architecture supporting QoS-AAA | Figure 1: An Architecture supporting QoS-AAA | |||
| Figure 1 depicts network elements through which application flows | Figure 1 depicts network elements through which application flows | |||
| need to pass, a cloud of AAA servers, and an authorizing entity. | need to pass, a cloud of AAA servers, and an authorizing entity. | |||
| Note that there may be more than one router that needs to interact | Note that there may be more than one router that needs to interact | |||
| with the AAA cloud along the path of a given application flow, | with the AAA cloud along the path of a given application flow, | |||
| although the figure only depicts one for clarity. QoS aware network | although the figure only depicts one for clarity. QoS aware network | |||
| elements will request authorization from the AAA cloud based on an | elements will request authorization from the AAA cloud based on an | |||
| incoming QoS reservation request. The AAA entities will route the | incoming QoS reservation request. The AAA entities will route the | |||
| request to a designated AAA authorizing entity, for example in the | request to a designated AAA authorizing entity, for example in the | |||
| home domain. The home authorizing entity will return the result of | home domain. The home authorizing entity will return the result of | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 46 ¶ | |||
| | Packet | | Interface | .+----------+ +---------+. | | Packet | | Interface | .+----------+ +---------+. | |||
| ===>|Processing|====| Selection |===.| Packet |====| Packet |.=> | ===>|Processing|====| Selection |===.| Packet |====| Packet |.=> | |||
| | | |(Forwarding)| .|Classifier| Scheduler|. | | | |(Forwarding)| .|Classifier| Scheduler|. | |||
| +----------+ +------------+ .+----------+ +---------+. | +----------+ +------------+ .+----------+ +---------+. | |||
| ............................. | ............................. | |||
| <.-.-> = signaling flow | <.-.-> = signaling flow | |||
| =====> = data flow (sender --> receiver) | =====> = data flow (sender --> receiver) | |||
| <<<>>> = control and configuration operations | <<<>>> = control and configuration operations | |||
| ****** = routing table manipulation | ****** = routing table manipulation | |||
| Figure 2: Network element functional model | Figure 2: Network element functional model | |||
| Processing of incoming QoS reservation requests includes three | Processing of incoming QoS reservation requests includes three | |||
| actions: admission control, authorization and resource reservation. | actions: admission control, authorization and resource reservation. | |||
| The admission control function provides information for available | The admission control function provides information for available | |||
| resources and determines whether there are enough resources to | resources and determines whether there are enough resources to | |||
| fulfill the request. Authorization is performed by the Diameter | fulfill the request. Authorization is performed by the Diameter | |||
| client function which involves contacting an authorization entity | client function which involves contacting an authorization entity | |||
| through the AAA cloud shown in Section 3. If both checks are | through the AAA cloud shown in Section 3. If both checks are | |||
| successful, the authorized QoS parameters are set in the packet | successful, the authorized QoS parameters are set in the packet | |||
| classifier and the packet scheduler. Note that the parameters passed | classifier and the packet scheduler. Note that the parameters passed | |||
| to the Traffic Control function may be different from requested QoS | to the Traffic Control function may be different from requested QoS | |||
| (depending on the authorization decision). Once the requested | (depending on the authorization decision). Once the requested | |||
| resource is granted, the Resource Management function provides | resource is granted, the Resource Management function provides | |||
| accounting information to the Authorizing entity using the Diameter | accounting information to the Authorizing entity using the Diameter | |||
| client function. | client function. | |||
| 3.2. Authorization models | 3.2. Authorization models | |||
| Three fundamental models for authorizing QoS reservations exist: one | Three fundamental models for authorizing QoS reservations exist: one | |||
| two-party and two three party models. See [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-aaa- | two-party and two three party models. See | |||
| issues] and in [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues] for a more | [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-aaa-issues] and in | |||
| detailed discussion of authorization models and the impact for QoS | [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues] for a more detailed discussion | |||
| reservations. The notation adopted here is in respect to the entity | of authorization models and the impact for QoS reservations. The | |||
| that performs the QoS authorization. The authentication of the QoS | notation adopted here is in respect to the entity that performs the | |||
| requesting entity might be done at the network element as part of the | QoS authorization. The authentication of the QoS requesting entity | |||
| QoS signaling protocol, or by an off-path protocol run (on the | might be done at the network element as part of the QoS signaling | |||
| application layer or for network access authentication) or the | protocol, or by an off-path protocol run (on the application layer or | |||
| authorizing entity might be contacted with request for authentication | for network access authentication) or the authorizing entity might be | |||
| and authorization of the QoS requesting entity. From the Diameter | contacted with request for authentication and authorization of the | |||
| QoS application's point of view these models differ in type of | QoS requesting entity. From the Diameter QoS application's point of | |||
| information that need to be carried. Here we focus on the 'Three | view these models differ in type of information that need to be | |||
| party model' (Figure 3) and the Token-based three party model' | carried. Here we focus on the 'Three party model' (Figure 3) and the | |||
| (Figure 4). With the 'Two party model' the QoS resource requesting | Token-based three party model' (Figure 4). With the 'Two party | |||
| entity is authenticated by the Network Element and the authorization | model' the QoS resource requesting entity is authenticated by the | |||
| decision is made either locally at the Network Element itself or | Network Element and the authorization decision is made either locally | |||
| offloaded to a trusted entity (most likely within the same | at the Network Element itself or offloaded to a trusted entity (most | |||
| administrative domain). In the former case no Diameter QoS protocol | likely within the same administrative domain). In the former case no | |||
| interaction is required. | Diameter QoS protocol interaction is required. | |||
| +--------------+ | +--------------+ | |||
| | Entity | | | Entity | | |||
| | authorizing | <......+ | | authorizing | <......+ | |||
| | resource | . | | resource | . | |||
| | request | . | | request | . | |||
| +------------+-+ . | +------------+-+ . | |||
| --^----------|-- . . | --^----------|-- . . | |||
| ///// | | \\\\\ . | ///// | | \\\\\ . | |||
| // | | \\ . | // | | \\ . | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | |||
| \\ | | // . | \\ | | // . | |||
| \\\\\ | | ///// . | \\\\\ | | ///// . | |||
| QoS --|----------v-- . . | QoS --|----------v-- . . | |||
| +-------------+ request +-+------------+ . | +-------------+ request +-+------------+ . | |||
| | Entity |----------------->| NE | . | | Entity |----------------->| NE | . | |||
| | requesting | | performing | . | | requesting | | performing | . | |||
| | resource |granted / rejected| QoS | <.....+ | | resource |granted / rejected| QoS | <.....+ | |||
| | |<-----------------| reservation | financial | | |<-----------------| reservation | financial | |||
| +-------------+ +--------------+ settlement | +-------------+ +--------------+ settlement | |||
| Figure 3: Three Party Model | Figure 3: Three Party Model | |||
| With the 'Three party model' a QoS reservation request that arrives | With the 'Three party model' a QoS reservation request that arrives | |||
| at the Network Element is forwarded to the Authorizing Entity (e.g., | at the Network Element is forwarded to the Authorizing Entity (e.g., | |||
| in the user's home network), where the authorization decision is | in the user's home network), where the authorization decision is | |||
| made. A business relationship, such as a roaming agreement, between | made. A business relationship, such as a roaming agreement, between | |||
| the visited network and the home network ensures that the visited | the visited network and the home network ensures that the visited | |||
| network is compensated for the resources consumed by the user via the | network is compensated for the resources consumed by the user via the | |||
| home network. | home network. | |||
| financial settlement | financial settlement | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 28 ¶ | |||
| | | \ | | . / . | | | \ | | . / . | |||
| | | \ | | / . | | | \ | | / . | |||
| | | QoS request |-----V . . | | | QoS request |-----V . . | |||
| +-------------+ + Authz. Token +--------+-----+ . | +-------------+ + Authz. Token +--------+-----+ . | |||
| | Entity |----------------->| NE | . | | Entity |----------------->| NE | . | |||
| | requesting | | performing | . | | requesting | | performing | . | |||
| | resource |granted / rejected| QoS | <....+ | | resource |granted / rejected| QoS | <....+ | |||
| | |<-----------------| reservation | | | |<-----------------| reservation | | |||
| +-------------+ +--------------+ | +-------------+ +--------------+ | |||
| Figure 4: Token-based Three Party Model | Figure 4: Token-based Three Party Model | |||
| The 'Token-based Three Party model' is applicable to environments | The 'Token-based Three Party model' is applicable to environments | |||
| where a previous protocol interaction is used to request | where a previous protocol interaction is used to request | |||
| authorization tokens to assist the authorization process at the | authorization tokens to assist the authorization process at the | |||
| Network Element or the Authorizing Entity. | Network Element or the Authorizing Entity. | |||
| The QoS resource requesting entity may be involved in an application | The QoS resource requesting entity may be involved in an application | |||
| layer protocol interaction, for example using SIP, with the | layer protocol interaction, for example using SIP, with the | |||
| Authorizing Entity. As part of this interaction, authentication and | Authorizing Entity. As part of this interaction, authentication and | |||
| authorization at the application layer might take place. As a result | authorization at the application layer might take place. As a result | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | |||
| o An identifier referring to a specific application protocol session | o An identifier referring to a specific application protocol session | |||
| for which the token was issued and | for which the token was issued and | |||
| o A keyed message digest or digital signature protecting the content | o A keyed message digest or digital signature protecting the content | |||
| of the authorization token. | of the authorization token. | |||
| A possible structure for the authorization token and the policy | A possible structure for the authorization token and the policy | |||
| element carrying it are proposed in context of RSVP [RFC3520], with | element carrying it are proposed in context of RSVP [RFC3520], with | |||
| the OSP [ETSI-OSP] or as outlined in [I-D.ietf-sipping-trait-authz] | the OSP [ETSI-OSP] or as outlined in [I-D.ietf-sipping-trait-authz] | |||
| and [I-D.tschofenig-sip-saml]. | and [I-D.tschofenig-sip-saml]. | |||
| In the scenario mentioned above, where the QoS resource requesting | ||||
| entity is involved in an application layer protocol interaction with | ||||
| the Authorizing entity, it may be worthwhile to consider a token less | ||||
| binding mechanism also. The application layer protocol interaction | ||||
| may have indicated the transport port numbers at the QoS resource | ||||
| requesting entity where it might receive media streams, for example | ||||
| in SIP/SDP signalling these port numbers are advertised. The QoS | ||||
| resource requesting entity may also use these port numbers in some IP | ||||
| filter indications to the NE performing QoS reservation so that it | ||||
| may properly tunnel the inbound packets. The NE performing QoS | ||||
| reservation will forward the QoS resource requesting entity's IP | ||||
| address and the IP filter indications to the Authorizing entity in | ||||
| the QoS authz. request. The Authorizing entity will use the QoS | ||||
| resource requesting entity's IP address and the port numbers in the | ||||
| IP filter indication, which will match the port numbers advertised in | ||||
| the earlier application layer protocol interaction, to identify the | ||||
| right piece of policy information to be sent to the NE performing the | ||||
| QoS reservation in the QoS authz. response. | ||||
| A Three party model based on "push" - where the Authorizing entity, | ||||
| subsequent to a successful application layer authorization, will send | ||||
| the policy information unsolicited to the NE performing QoS | ||||
| reservation is shown below. | ||||
| financial settlement | ||||
| ...........................+ | ||||
| Application Layer V ------- . | ||||
| Protocol +--------------+ / QoS AAA \ . | ||||
| +-------------->| | / protocol \ . | ||||
| | | Authorizing +--------------+ \ . | ||||
| | | Entity | | | | . | ||||
| | + |<--+----+ | | . | ||||
| | +--------------+ |QoS | |QoS |. | ||||
| | install| |install | ||||
| | |rsp. | |req. |. | ||||
| | | | | |. | ||||
| | | | | . | . | ||||
| | \ | | . / . | ||||
| | \ | | / . | ||||
| V |-----V . . | ||||
| +-------------+ +--------+-----+ . | ||||
| | Entity | | NE | . | ||||
| | requesting | | performing | . | ||||
| | resource |QoS rsrc granted | QoS | <....+ | ||||
| | |<-----------------| reservation | | ||||
| +-------------+ +--------------+ | ||||
| Figure 5: Three Party Push Model | ||||
| In the three party QoS model where the QoS resource requesting entity | ||||
| is involved in an application layer protocol interaction with the | ||||
| Authorizing entity, the Authorizing entity may be considered as two | ||||
| separate functional entities - an Application function (AF)and a | ||||
| Policy Decision function (PDF). The AF and PDF interact using the | ||||
| QoS AAA protocol. The AF will pass dynamic QoS-related application | ||||
| information with the PDF. The PDF will choose the right piece of | ||||
| policy information to be applied at the Policy Enforcement Point | ||||
| (PEP) in the NE performing QoS reservation. | ||||
| The policy information may be pushed to the PEP or may be requested/ | ||||
| pulled by the NE performing QoS reservation. The first message of | ||||
| the QoS AAA session between the AF and the PDF may include an | ||||
| indication on whether to use the push or the pull mode. | ||||
| 3.3. QoS authorization considerations | 3.3. QoS authorization considerations | |||
| A QoS authorization application must meet a number of requirements | A QoS authorization application must meet a number of requirements | |||
| applicable to a diverse set of networking environments and services. | applicable to a diverse set of networking environments and services. | |||
| It should be compliant with different deployment scenarios with | It should be compliant with different deployment scenarios with | |||
| specific QoS signaling models and security issues. Satisfying the | specific QoS signaling models and security issues. Satisfying the | |||
| requirements listed below while interworking with QoS signaling | requirements listed below while interworking with QoS signaling | |||
| protocols, a Diameter QoS application should accommodate the | protocols, a Diameter QoS application should accommodate the | |||
| capabilities of the QoS signaling protocols rather than introducing | capabilities of the QoS signaling protocols rather than introducing | |||
| functional requirements on them. A list of requirements for a QoS | functional requirements on them. A list of requirements for a QoS | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 37 ¶ | |||
| between the the QoS resource requesting entity and the QoS Network | between the the QoS resource requesting entity and the QoS Network | |||
| Element might be accomplished using the NSIS protocol suite, RSVP or | Element might be accomplished using the NSIS protocol suite, RSVP or | |||
| a link layer signaling protocol. A description of these protocols is | a link layer signaling protocol. A description of these protocols is | |||
| also outside the scope of this document and a tight coupling with | also outside the scope of this document and a tight coupling with | |||
| these protocols is not desirable since this applications aims to be | these protocols is not desirable since this applications aims to be | |||
| generic. | generic. | |||
| 4.2. Initial QoS authorization (Diameter QoS authorization session | 4.2. Initial QoS authorization (Diameter QoS authorization session | |||
| establishment) | establishment) | |||
| Figure 6 shows the protocol interaction between a resource requesting | Figure 7 shows the protocol interaction between a resource requesting | |||
| entity, a Network Element and the Authorizing Entity. | entity, a Network Element and the Authorizing Entity. | |||
| A request for a QoS reservation received by a Network Element | A request for a QoS reservation received by a Network Element | |||
| initiates a Diameter QoS authorization session. The Network Element | initiates a Diameter QoS authorization session. The Network Element | |||
| generates a QoS-Authorization-Request (QAR) message in which it maps | generates a QoS-Authorization-Request (QAR) message in which it maps | |||
| required objects from the QoS signaling message to Diameter payload | required objects from the QoS signaling message to Diameter payload | |||
| objects - Attribute Value Parts (AVPs, [RFC3588]). | objects - Attribute Value Pairs (AVPs, [RFC3588]). | |||
| +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | |||
| | QoS authorization data | Diameter QoS AVPs (Section 7) | | | QoS authorization data | Diameter QoS AVPs (Section 7) | | |||
| +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | |||
| | Authorizing entity ID (e.g., | Destination-Host | | | Authorizing entity ID (e.g., | Destination-Host | | |||
| |taken from authorization token or | Destination-Realm | | |taken from authorization token or | Destination-Realm | | |||
| |from Network Access ID(NAI), | | | |from Network Access ID(NAI), | | | |||
| |[RFC2486] of the QoS requesting | | | |[RFC2486] of the QoS requesting | | | |||
| |entity) | | | |entity) | | | |||
| +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 48 ¶ | |||
| | |CC-Time,Acc-Multisess-id)| | | |CC-Time,Acc-Multisess-id)| | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | | | Report for successful | | | | | Report for successful | | |||
| | | | QoS reservation | | | | | QoS reservation | | |||
| | | |Update of reserved QoS | | | | |Update of reserved QoS | | |||
| | | | resources | | | | | resources | | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| Figure 6: Initial QoS request authorization | Figure 7: Initial QoS request authorization | |||
| The Authorizing Entity keeps authorization session state and SHOULD | The Authorizing Entity keeps authorization session state and SHOULD | |||
| save additional information for management of the session (e.g., Acc- | save additional information for management of the session (e.g., Acc- | |||
| Multi-Session-Id, Signaling-Session-Id, authentication data) as part | Multi-Session-Id, Signaling-Session-Id, authentication data) as part | |||
| of the session state information. A Signaling-session-Id (if | of the session state information. A Signaling-session-Id (if | |||
| present) SHOULD be used together with the generated Acc-Multi- | present) SHOULD be used together with the generated Acc-Multi- | |||
| Session-Id AVP (see Section 7.3) for binding the authorization and | Session-Id AVP (see Section 7.3) for binding the authorization and | |||
| the accounting session information in case of end host mobility | the accounting session information in case of end host mobility | |||
| (i.e., to correlate the Diameter sessions that are initiated for the | (i.e., to correlate the Diameter sessions that are initiated for the | |||
| same signaling session from different QoS NE). | same signaling session from different QoS NE). | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 52 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 52 ¶ | |||
| 4.3.1. Client-side initiated Re-Authorization | 4.3.1. Client-side initiated Re-Authorization | |||
| The Authorizing Entity provides the duration of the authorization | The Authorizing Entity provides the duration of the authorization | |||
| session as part of the QoS-Authorization-Answer message (QAA). At | session as part of the QoS-Authorization-Answer message (QAA). At | |||
| any time before expiration of this period, a new QoS-Authorization- | any time before expiration of this period, a new QoS-Authorization- | |||
| Request message (QAR) MAY be sent to the Authorizing Entity. The | Request message (QAR) MAY be sent to the Authorizing Entity. The | |||
| transmission of the QAR MAY be triggered when the Network Element | transmission of the QAR MAY be triggered when the Network Element | |||
| receives a QoS signaling message that requires modification of the | receives a QoS signaling message that requires modification of the | |||
| authorized parameters of an ongoing QoS session, when authorization | authorized parameters of an ongoing QoS session, when authorization | |||
| lifetime expires or by an accounting event. (see Section 5)(Figure 7) | lifetime expires or by an accounting event. (see Section 5)(Figure 8) | |||
| Authorizing | Authorizing | |||
| End-Host Network Element Entity | End-Host Network Element Entity | |||
| requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | |||
| QoS Client) QoS Server) | QoS Client) QoS Server) | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | +-------+----------+ | | | +-------+----------+ | | |||
| | |Authz-time/CC-Time| | | | |Authz-time/CC-Time| | | |||
| | | expires | | | | | expires | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 23, line 46 ¶ | |||
| | |CC-Time,Acc-Multisess-id)| | | |CC-Time,Acc-Multisess-id)| | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | | |Update of QoS resources| | | | |Update of QoS resources| | |||
| | | |/CC-Time,Cost/ used | | | | |/CC-Time,Cost/ used | | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| Figure 7: QoS request re-authorization | Figure 8: QoS request re-authorization | |||
| 4.3.2. Server-side initiated Re-Authorization | 4.3.2. Server-side initiated Re-Authorization | |||
| The Authorizing Entity MAY optionally initiate a QoS re-authorization | The Authorizing Entity MAY optionally initiate a QoS re-authorization | |||
| by issuing a Re-Auth-Request message (RAR) as defined in the Diameter | by issuing a Re-Auth-Request message (RAR) as defined in the Diameter | |||
| base protocol [RFC3588]. A Network Element client that receives such | base protocol [RFC3588]. A Network Element client that receives such | |||
| a RAR message with Session-Id matching a currently active QoS session | a RAR message with Session-Id matching a currently active QoS session | |||
| acknowledges the request by sending the Re-Auth-Answer (RAA) message | acknowledges the request by sending the Re-Auth-Answer (RAA) message | |||
| and MUST initiate a QoS reservation re-authorization by sending a | and MUST initiate a QoS reservation re-authorization by sending a | |||
| QoS-Authorization-Request (QAR) message towards the Authorizing | QoS-Authorization-Request (QAR) message towards the Authorizing | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 22 ¶ | skipping to change at page 24, line 27 ¶ | |||
| In certain deployment scenarios (mostly applicable for local QoS | In certain deployment scenarios (mostly applicable for local QoS | |||
| provision) an active control over the QoS resource and QoS enabled | provision) an active control over the QoS resource and QoS enabled | |||
| data flows from the network side is required. Therefore, the | data flows from the network side is required. Therefore, the | |||
| Authorizing Entity is enabled to update installed QoS parameters and | Authorizing Entity is enabled to update installed QoS parameters and | |||
| flow state at the Network Element by sending a QoS-Install Request | flow state at the Network Element by sending a QoS-Install Request | |||
| message (QIR). Network Elements MUST apply the updates and respond | message (QIR). Network Elements MUST apply the updates and respond | |||
| with an QoS-Install Answer message (QIA). This functionality, for | with an QoS-Install Answer message (QIA). This functionality, for | |||
| example, allows the update of already authorized flow status of an | example, allows the update of already authorized flow status of an | |||
| established QoS reservation due to a change at the application layer | established QoS reservation due to a change at the application layer | |||
| session (Figure 8). | session (Figure 9). | |||
| Authorizing | Authorizing | |||
| End-Host Network Element Entity | End-Host Network Element Entity | |||
| requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | |||
| QoS Client) QoS Server) | QoS Client) QoS Server) | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| +===================+=Data Flow==========================> | +===================+=Data Flow==========================> | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | | |Data flow preemption | | | | |Data flow preemption | | |||
| | | +--------+--------------+ | | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 25, line 4 ¶ | |||
| | +-------+---------+ | | | +-------+---------+ | | |||
| | |Update QoS state | | | | |Update QoS state | | | |||
| | | + | | | | | + | | | |||
| | | Authz. session | | | | | Authz. session | | | |||
| | |/QoS-Flow-State= | | | | |/QoS-Flow-State= | | | |||
| | | CLOSE/ | | | | | CLOSE/ | | | |||
| | +-------+---------+ | | | +-------+---------+ | | |||
| +====Data Flow=====>X | | +====Data Flow=====>X | | |||
| | +- - - - - QIA - - - - - >| | | +- - - - - QIA - - - - - >| | |||
| | | (Result-Code) | | | | (Result-Code) | | |||
| Figure 9: Server-side initiated QoS parameter provisioning | ||||
| Figure 8: Server-side initiated QoS parameter provisioning | ||||
| The Authorizing Entity MAY initiate a QoS authorization session | The Authorizing Entity MAY initiate a QoS authorization session | |||
| establishment and QoS reservation state installation (prior to a | establishment and QoS reservation state installation (prior to a | |||
| request from a Network Element). This function requires that the | request from a Network Element). This function requires that the | |||
| Authorizing Entity has knowledge of specific information identifying | Authorizing Entity has knowledge of specific information identifying | |||
| the Network Element that should be contacted and the data flow for | the Network Element that should be contacted and the data flow for | |||
| which the QoS reservation should be established.(mostly applicable | which the QoS reservation should be established.(mostly applicable | |||
| for local scenarios) | for local scenarios) | |||
| 4.5. Session Termination | 4.5. Session Termination | |||
| skipping to change at page 23, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 25, line 27 ¶ | |||
| The authorization session for an installed QoS reservation state MAY | The authorization session for an installed QoS reservation state MAY | |||
| be terminated by the Diameter client by sending a Session- | be terminated by the Diameter client by sending a Session- | |||
| Termination-Request message (STR) to the Diameter server. This is a | Termination-Request message (STR) to the Diameter server. This is a | |||
| Diameter base protocol function and it is defined in [RFC3588]. | Diameter base protocol function and it is defined in [RFC3588]. | |||
| Session termination can be caused by a QoS signaling messaging | Session termination can be caused by a QoS signaling messaging | |||
| requesting deletion of the existing QoS reservation state or it can | requesting deletion of the existing QoS reservation state or it can | |||
| be caused as a result of a soft-state expiration of the QoS | be caused as a result of a soft-state expiration of the QoS | |||
| reservation state. After a successful termination of the | reservation state. After a successful termination of the | |||
| authorization session, final accounting messages MUST be exchanged | authorization session, final accounting messages MUST be exchanged | |||
| (Figure 9). It should be noted that the two sessions (authorization | (Figure 10). It should be noted that the two sessions (authorization | |||
| and accounting) have independent management by the Diameter base | and accounting) have independent management by the Diameter base | |||
| protocol, which allows for finalizing the accounting session after | protocol, which allows for finalizing the accounting session after | |||
| the end of the authorization session. | the end of the authorization session. | |||
| Authorizing | Authorizing | |||
| End-Host Network Element Entity | End-Host Network Element Entity | |||
| requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | |||
| QoS Client) QoS Server) | QoS Client) QoS Server) | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| |==Data Flow==>X /Stop of the data flow/ | | |==Data Flow==>X /Stop of the data flow/ | | |||
| skipping to change at page 24, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 26, line 42 ¶ | |||
| | | Report for successful | | | | Report for successful | | |||
| | | end of QoS session | | | | end of QoS session | | |||
| | +--------+--------------+ | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |||
| | | | | |||
| | QoS Responder | | QoS Responder | |||
| | Node | | Node | |||
| |<---------QoS-Response----....----+ | |<---------QoS-Response----....----+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| Figure 9: Client-side initiated session termination | Figure 10: Client-side initiated session termination | |||
| 4.5.2. Server-side initiated session termination | 4.5.2. Server-side initiated session termination | |||
| At anytime during a session the Authorizing Entity MAY send an Abort- | At anytime during a session the Authorizing Entity MAY send an Abort- | |||
| Session-Request message (ASR) to the Network Element. This is a | Session-Request message (ASR) to the Network Element. This is a | |||
| Diameter base protocol function and it is defined in [RFC3588]. | Diameter base protocol function and it is defined in [RFC3588]. | |||
| Possible reasons for initiating the ASR message to the Network | Possible reasons for initiating the ASR message to the Network | |||
| Element are insufficient credits or session termination at the | Element are insufficient credits or session termination at the | |||
| application layer. The ASR message results in termination of the | application layer. The ASR message results in termination of the | |||
| authorized session, release of the reserved resources at the Network | authorized session, release of the reserved resources at the Network | |||
| Element and transmission of an appropriate QoS signaling message | Element and transmission of an appropriate QoS signaling message | |||
| indicating a notification to other Network Elements aware of the | indicating a notification to other Network Elements aware of the | |||
| signaling session. A final accounting message exchange MUST be | signaling session. A final accounting message exchange MUST be | |||
| triggered as a result of this ASR message exchange (Figure 10). | triggered as a result of this ASR message exchange (Figure 11). | |||
| Authorizing | Authorizing | |||
| End-Host Network Element Entity | End-Host Network Element Entity | |||
| requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | requesting QoS ( Diameter ( Diameter | |||
| QoS Client) QoS Server) | QoS Client) QoS Server) | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |=====================Data Flow==========================> | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| | |< - - - - ASR - - - - - -+ | | |< - - - - ASR - - - - - -+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 25, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 27, line 46 ¶ | |||
| | +--------+--------------+ | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| | | Report for successful | | | | Report for successful | | |||
| | | end of QoS session | | | | end of QoS session | | |||
| | +--------+--------------+ | | +--------+--------------+ | |||
| |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |< - - - - ACA - - - - - -+ | |||
| | QoS Responder | | QoS Responder | |||
| | Node | | Node | |||
| |<---------QoS-Response----....----+ | |<---------QoS-Response----....----+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| Figure 10: Server-side initiated session termination | Figure 11: Server-side initiated session termination | |||
| 5. Accounting | 5. Accounting | |||
| The Diameter QoS application provides accounting for usage of | The Diameter QoS application provides accounting for usage of | |||
| reserved QoS resources. Diameter QoS accounting has built-in support | reserved QoS resources. Diameter QoS accounting has built-in support | |||
| for online, duration based accounting. This accounting is based on | for online, duration based accounting. This accounting is based on | |||
| the notion that the routers making the QoS Authorization Request | the notion that the routers making the QoS Authorization Request | |||
| (Diameter QoS clients) are in the best position to determine the cost | (Diameter QoS clients) are in the best position to determine the cost | |||
| of those resources. This cost represents the financial settlement | of those resources. This cost represents the financial settlement | |||
| that will be ultimately demanded by the owner of the router if the | that will be ultimately demanded by the owner of the router if the | |||
| skipping to change at page 26, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 28, line 44 ¶ | |||
| in the Cost-Information AVPs, the Resource Authorizing Entity can use | in the Cost-Information AVPs, the Resource Authorizing Entity can use | |||
| the CC-Time AVP to guarantee that the total cost of the session will | the CC-Time AVP to guarantee that the total cost of the session will | |||
| not exceed a certain threshold, which allows, for example, support of | not exceed a certain threshold, which allows, for example, support of | |||
| prepaid users. | prepaid users. | |||
| Each ACR message contains a triplet of QoS-Authorization-Resources | Each ACR message contains a triplet of QoS-Authorization-Resources | |||
| AVP, Cost-Information AVP, and CC-Time AVP. This represents the | AVP, Cost-Information AVP, and CC-Time AVP. This represents the | |||
| total time consumed at the given cost for the given resources. Note | total time consumed at the given cost for the given resources. Note | |||
| that an ACR message MUST be sent separately for each interval defined | that an ACR message MUST be sent separately for each interval defined | |||
| by the Tariff-Time-Change AVPs and the expiration of the CC-Time | by the Tariff-Time-Change AVPs and the expiration of the CC-Time | |||
| returned in the QAA (Figure 7). | returned in the QAA (Figure 8). | |||
| The Network Element starts an accounting session by sending an | The Network Element starts an accounting session by sending an | |||
| Accounting-Request message (ACR) after successful QoS reservation and | Accounting-Request message (ACR) after successful QoS reservation and | |||
| activation of the data flow (Figure 6). After every successful re- | activation of the data flow (Figure 7). After every successful re- | |||
| authorization procedure the Network element MUST initiate an interim | authorization procedure the Network element MUST initiate an interim | |||
| accounting message exchange (Figure 7). After successful session | accounting message exchange (Figure 8). After successful session | |||
| termination the Network element MUST initiate a final exchange of | termination the Network element MUST initiate a final exchange of | |||
| accounting messages for terminating of the accounting session and | accounting messages for terminating of the accounting session and | |||
| reporting final records for the usage of the QoS resources reserved. | reporting final records for the usage of the QoS resources reserved. | |||
| (Figure 9). | (Figure 10). | |||
| 6. Diameter QoS authorization application Messages | 6. Diameter QoS authorization application Messages | |||
| The Diameter QoS Application requires the definition of new mandatory | The Diameter QoS Application requires the definition of new mandatory | |||
| AVPs and Command-codes (Section 3 of [RFC3588]). Four new Diameter | AVPs and Command-codes (Section 3 of [RFC3588]). Four new Diameter | |||
| messages are defined along with Command-Codes whose values MUST be | messages are defined along with Command-Codes whose values MUST be | |||
| supported by all Diameter implementations that conform to this | supported by all Diameter implementations that conform to this | |||
| specification. | specification. | |||
| Command-Name Abbrev. Code Reference | Command-Name Abbrev. Code Reference | |||
| skipping to change at page 31, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 33, line 5 ¶ | |||
| { Destination-Realm } | { Destination-Realm } | |||
| { Auth-Request-Type } | { Auth-Request-Type } | |||
| [ Destination-Host ] | [ Destination-Host ] | |||
| * [ QoS-Authorization-Resources ] | * [ QoS-Authorization-Resources ] | |||
| [ Session-Timeout ] | [ Session-Timeout ] | |||
| [ Authz-Session-Lifetime ] | [ Authz-Session-Lifetime ] | |||
| [ Authz-Grace-Period ] | [ Authz-Grace-Period ] | |||
| [ Authz-Session-Volume ] | [ Authz-Session-Volume ] | |||
| * [ AVP ] | * [ AVP ] | |||
| 6.4. QoS-Install Answer (QAA) | 6.4. QoS-Install Answer (QIA) | |||
| The QoS-Install Answer message (QAA), indicated by the Command-Code | The QoS-Install Answer message (QIA), indicated by the Command-Code | |||
| field set to TBD and 'R' bit cleared in the Command Flags field is | field set to TBD and 'R' bit cleared in the Command Flags field is | |||
| sent in response to the QoS-Install Request message (QIR) for | sent in response to the QoS-Install Request message (QIR) for | |||
| confirmation of the result of the installation of the provided QoS | confirmation of the result of the installation of the provided QoS | |||
| reservation instructions. | reservation instructions. | |||
| The message format is defined as follows: | The message format is defined as follows: | |||
| <QoS-Install-Answer> ::= < Diameter Header: XXX, PXY > | <QoS-Install-Answer> ::= < Diameter Header: XXX, PXY > | |||
| < Session-Id > | < Session-Id > | |||
| { Auth-Application-Id } | { Auth-Application-Id } | |||
| skipping to change at page 40, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 42, line 44 ¶ | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| /------------------+--Data Flow---------------------------\ | /------------------+--Data Flow---------------------------\ | |||
| \------------------+--------------------------------------/ | \------------------+--------------------------------------/ | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| .-.-.-.-. SIP signaling | .-.-.-.-. SIP signaling | |||
| --------- QoS NSLP signaling | --------- QoS NSLP signaling | |||
| - - - - - Diameter QoS Application messages | - - - - - Diameter QoS Application messages | |||
| ========= Mapping of objects between QoS and AAA protocol | ========= Mapping of objects between QoS and AAA protocol | |||
| Figure 27: Example for a token-based QoS authorization | Figure 28: Example for a token-based QoS authorization | |||
| The communication starts with SIP signaling between the two end | The communication starts with SIP signaling between the two end | |||
| points and the SIP server for negotiation and authorization of the | points and the SIP server for negotiation and authorization of the | |||
| requested service and its parameters (Figure 27). As a part of the | requested service and its parameters (Figure 28). As a part of the | |||
| process, the SIP server verifies whether the user at Host A is | process, the SIP server verifies whether the user at Host A is | |||
| authorized to use the requested service (and potentially the ability | authorized to use the requested service (and potentially the ability | |||
| to be charged for the service usage). Negotiated session parameters | to be charged for the service usage). Negotiated session parameters | |||
| are provided to the end host. | are provided to the end host. | |||
| Subsequently, Host A initiates a QoS signaling message towards Host | Subsequently, Host A initiates a QoS signaling message towards Host | |||
| B. It sends a QoS NSLP Reserve message, in which it includes | B. It sends a QoS NSLP Reserve message, in which it includes | |||
| description of the required QoS (QSPEC object) and authorization data | description of the required QoS (QSPEC object) and authorization data | |||
| for negotiated service session (part of the POLICY_DATA object). | for negotiated service session (part of the POLICY_DATA object). | |||
| Authorization data includes, as a minimum, the identity of the | Authorization data includes, as a minimum, the identity of the | |||
| skipping to change at page 45, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 47, line 10 ¶ | |||
| 11. Open Issues | 11. Open Issues | |||
| Open issues related to this draft are listed at the issue tracker | Open issues related to this draft are listed at the issue tracker | |||
| available at: http://www.tschofenig.com:8080/diameter-qos/ | available at: http://www.tschofenig.com:8080/diameter-qos/ | |||
| 12. References | 12. References | |||
| 12.1. Normative References | 12.1. Normative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-nsis-qspec] | [I-D.ietf-nsis-qspec] | |||
| Ash, J., "QoS-NSLP QSPEC Template", | Ash, J., "QoS NSLP QSPEC Template", | |||
| draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-08 (work in progress), | draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-12 (work in progress), October 2006. | |||
| December 2005. | ||||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [RFC2234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax | [RFC2234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax | |||
| Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. | Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. | |||
| [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. | [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. | |||
| Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. | Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. | |||
| skipping to change at page 45, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 47, line 41 ¶ | |||
| [ETSI-OSP] | [ETSI-OSP] | |||
| European Telecommunications Standards Institute, | European Telecommunications Standards Institute, | |||
| "Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization | "Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization | |||
| Over Networks (TIPHON); Open Settlement Protocol (OSP) | Over Networks (TIPHON); Open Settlement Protocol (OSP) | |||
| for Inter-domain pricing, authorization, and usage | for Inter-domain pricing, authorization, and usage | |||
| exchange", TS 101 321. | exchange", TS 101 321. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-nsis-ntlp] | [I-D.ietf-nsis-ntlp] | |||
| Schulzrinne, H. and R. Hancock, "GIST: General Internet | Schulzrinne, H. and R. Hancock, "GIST: General Internet | |||
| Signaling Transport", draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-09 (work in | Signaling Transport", draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-11 (work in | |||
| progress), February 2006. | progress), August 2006. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-nsis-qos-nslp] | [I-D.ietf-nsis-qos-nslp] | |||
| Manner, J., "NSLP for Quality-of-Service signalling", | Manner, J., "NSLP for Quality-of-Service Signaling", | |||
| draft-ietf-nsis-qos-nslp-09 (work in progress), | draft-ietf-nsis-qos-nslp-11 (work in progress), June 2006. | |||
| February 2006. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-sipping-trait-authz] | [I-D.ietf-sipping-trait-authz] | |||
| Peterson, J., "Trait-based Authorization Requirements for | Peterson, J., "Trait-based Authorization Requirements for | |||
| the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", | the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", | |||
| draft-ietf-sipping-trait-authz-02 (work in progress), | draft-ietf-sipping-trait-authz-02 (work in progress), | |||
| January 2006. | January 2006. | |||
| [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-aaa-issues] | [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-aaa-issues] | |||
| Tschofenig, H., "NSIS Authentication, Authorization and | Tschofenig, H., "NSIS Authentication, Authorization and | |||
| Accounting Issues", draft-tschofenig-nsis-aaa-issues-01 | Accounting Issues", draft-tschofenig-nsis-aaa-issues-01 | |||
| (work in progress), March 2003. | (work in progress), March 2003. | |||
| [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues] | [I-D.tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues] | |||
| Tschofenig, H., "QoS NSLP Authorization Issues", | Tschofenig, H., "QoS NSLP Authorization Issues", | |||
| draft-tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues-00 (work in | draft-tschofenig-nsis-qos-authz-issues-00 (work in | |||
| progress), June 2003. | progress), June 2003. | |||
| [I-D.tschofenig-sip-saml] | [I-D.tschofenig-sip-saml] | |||
| Tschofenig, H., "Using SAML for SIP", | Tschofenig, H., "SIP SAML Profile and Binding", | |||
| draft-tschofenig-sip-saml-04 (work in progress), | draft-tschofenig-sip-saml-05 (work in progress), | |||
| July 2005. | March 2006. | |||
| [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated | [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated | |||
| Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. | Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. | |||
| [RFC2327] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description | [RFC2327] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description | |||
| Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998. | Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998. | |||
| [RFC2486] Aboba, B. and M. Beadles, "The Network Access Identifier", | [RFC2486] Aboba, B. and M. Beadles, "The Network Access Identifier", | |||
| RFC 2486, January 1999. | RFC 2486, January 1999. | |||
| skipping to change at page 49, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 50, line 40 ¶ | |||
| Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@siemens.com | Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@siemens.com | |||
| URI: http://www.tschofenig.com | URI: http://www.tschofenig.com | |||
| Tseno Tsenov | Tseno Tsenov | |||
| Sofia, | Sofia, | |||
| Bulgaria | Bulgaria | |||
| Email: tseno.tsenov@mytum.de | Email: tseno.tsenov@mytum.de | |||
| Intellectual Property Statement | Tina Tsou | |||
| Shenzhen, | ||||
| P.R.C | ||||
| Email: tena@huawei.com | ||||
| Full 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. | ||||
| 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. | ||||
| Intellectual Property | ||||
| The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | |||
| Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | |||
| pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | |||
| this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | 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 | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | |||
| made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | |||
| on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | |||
| found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| skipping to change at page 49, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 51, line 45 ¶ | |||
| such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | |||
| specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | |||
| The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | |||
| copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | |||
| rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement | rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement | |||
| this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at | this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at | |||
| ietf-ipr@ietf.org. | 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 | Acknowledgment | |||
| Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the | Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF | |||
| Internet Society. | Administrative Support Activity (IASA). | |||
| End of changes. 39 change blocks. | ||||
| 109 lines changed or deleted | 177 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/ | ||||