idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3667, Section 5.1 on line 15. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 1764. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 1741. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 1748. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 1754. ** Found boilerplate matching RFC 3978, Section 5.4, paragraph 1 (on line 1770), which is fine, but *also* found old RFC 2026, Section 10.4C, paragraph 1 text on line 37. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. ** The document uses RFC 3667 boilerplate or RFC 3978-like boilerplate instead of verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate. After 6 May 2005, submission of drafts without verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate is not accepted. The following non-3978 patterns matched text found in the document. That text should be removed or replaced: By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 54 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 125 characters in excess of 72. ** There are 385 instances of lines with control characters in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 438 has weird spacing: '...ined in the c...' == Line 645 has weird spacing: '...N codes to...' == Line 751 has weird spacing: '...allowed to in...' == Line 764 has weird spacing: '...allowed to in...' == Line 962 has weird spacing: '...o allow exten...' == (1 more instance...) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (September 9, 2004) is 7162 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: '5' is defined on line 1636, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '8' is defined on line 1647, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '11' is defined on line 1660, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '12' is defined on line 1665, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '21' is defined on line 1702, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2141 (ref. '3') (Obsoleted by RFC 8141) ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 2648 (ref. '4') -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '6' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3023 (ref. '7') (Obsoleted by RFC 7303) -- No information found for draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-req - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '8' == Outdated reference: A later version (-07) exists of draft-ietf-sipping-cc-conferencing-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-simple-xcap-02 == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of draft-ietf-simple-xcap-list-usage-02 == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-ietf-simple-xcap-package-01 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '12' == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-framework-01 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-framework (ref. '13') == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-sipping-conference-package-03 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2617 (ref. '16') (Obsoleted by RFC 7235, RFC 7615, RFC 7616, RFC 7617) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2818 (ref. '17') (Obsoleted by RFC 9110) == Outdated reference: A later version (-01) exists of draft-rosen-xcon-conf-sidebars-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-01) exists of draft-ietf-xcon-conference-policy-privileges-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-jennings-xcon-media-control-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-26) exists of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-new-18 Summary: 14 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 23 warnings (==), 11 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 XCON H. Khartabil 2 Internet-Draft P. Koskelainen 3 Expires: March 10, 2005 A. Niemi 4 Nokia 5 September 9, 2004 7 The Conference Policy Control Protocol (CPCP) 8 draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-00 10 Status of this Memo 12 By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable 13 patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, 14 and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with 15 RFC 3668. 17 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 18 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 19 other groups may also distribute working documents as 20 Internet-Drafts. 22 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 23 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 24 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 25 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 27 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 28 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 30 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 33 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 10, 2005. 35 Copyright Notice 37 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 39 Abstract 41 The Conference Policy is defined as the complete set of rules for a 42 particular conference manipulated by the conference policy server. 43 The Conferece Policy Control Protocol (CPCP) is the protocol used by 44 clients to manipulate the conference policy. This document describes 45 the Conference Policy Control Protocol (CPCP). It specifies an 46 Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema that enumerates the 47 conference policy data elements that enable a user to define a 48 conference policy. 50 Table of Contents 52 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 53 2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 54 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 4. Structure of a Conference Policy document . . . . . . . . . . 4 56 4.1 MIME Type for CPCP XML Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 57 4.2 Conference Root . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 58 4.3 XML Document Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 59 4.3.1 Conference Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 60 4.3.2 Conference Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 61 4.3.3 Conference Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 62 4.3.4 Conference Authorization Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 63 4.3.5 Conference Dial-Out List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 64 4.3.6 Conference Refer List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 65 4.3.7 Conference Media Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 66 4.4 XML Schema Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 67 4.5 XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 68 5. Conference Policy Manipulation and Conference Entity 69 Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 70 5.1 Overview of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 71 5.2 Use of External Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 72 5.3 Communication Between Conference Entities . . . . . . . . 28 73 5.4 Manipulating Participant Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 74 5.4.1 Expelling a Participant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 75 5.5 Re-joining a Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 76 6. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 77 6.1 A Simple Conference Policy Document . . . . . . . . . . . 30 78 6.2 A Complex Conference Policy Document . . . . . . . . . . . 31 79 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 80 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 81 8.1 XCAP Application Usage ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 82 8.2 application/conference-policy+xml MIME TYPE . . . . . . . 34 83 8.3 URN Sub-Namespace Registration for 84 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:conference-policy . . . . . . . . . 35 85 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 86 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 87 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 88 11.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 89 11.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 90 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 91 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 40 93 1. Introduction 95 The SIP conferencing framework [13] defines the mechanisms for 96 multi-party centralized conferencing in a SIP environment. 98 Existing SIP mechanisms allow users, for example, to join and leave a 99 conference, as described in [9]. A centralised server, called focus, 100 can expel and invite users, and may have proprietary access control 101 lists and user privilege definitions. This document defines an XML 102 Schema in Section 4 that enumerates the conference policy data 103 elements that enable a user to define a conference policy. This 104 policy document may be given to a focus using a number of transports 105 that are outside the scope of this document. 107 A focus conforming to this specification MUST support the XML object 108 defined in Section 4. 110 2. Conventions Used in This Document 112 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 113 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 114 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [2]. 116 3. Terminology 118 This document uses terminology from [13]. Some additional 119 definitions are introduced here. 121 Conference authorization policy (CAP): Conference authorization 122 policy consists of an unordered set of rules, which control the 123 permissions and privileges that are given to conference 124 participants. 126 Conference Policy Server (CPS): Conference Policy Server. See [13] 128 Conference participant: Conference participant is a user who has an 129 on-going session (e.g. SIP dialog) with the conference focus. 131 Floor control: Floor control is a mechanism that enables 132 applications or users to gain safe and mutually exclusive or 133 non-exclusive access to the shared object or resource in a 134 conference. 136 Dial-Out List (DL): The Dial-out list (DL) is a list of users who 137 the focus needs to invite to the conference. 139 Privileged user: A privileged user is a user that has the right to 140 manipulate parts or all of the conference policy XML document. 142 Conference Policy URI: The URI of conference policy. It identifies 143 the XML document. The URI construction is specified in [10]. 145 Refer List (RL): The Refer list (RL) is a list of users who the 146 focus needs to refer to the conference. 148 Sidebar: A sub-conference of a main conference. 150 4. Structure of a Conference Policy document 152 The conference policy document is an XML [6] document that MUST be 153 well-formed and MUST be valid. The Conference policy documents MUST 154 be based on XML 1.0 and MUST be encoded using UTF-8. This 155 specification makes use of XML namespaces for identifying conference 156 policy documents and document fragments. The namespace URI for 157 elements defined by this specification is a URN [3], using the 158 namespace identifier 'ietf' defined by [4] and extended by [15]. 159 This URN is: 161 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:conference-policy 163 4.1 MIME Type for CPCP XML Document 165 The MIME type for the CPCP XML document is "application/ 166 conference-policy+xml". 168 4.2 Conference Root 170 A conference policy document begins with the root element tag 171 . Other elements from different namespaces MAY be 172 present for the purposes of extensibility. Elements or attributes 173 from unknown namespaces MUST be ignored. The conference policy is 174 build up using the following: 176 o The element: This element is mandatory and contains 177 various conference settings. It contains the conference URI(s), 178 the maximum number of participants, the conference security level, 179 and sidebar settings. It can occur only once in the document. 181 o The element: This element is optional and includes 182 information describing the conference, that can be used, for 183 example, search purposes. This information can also be used in 184 the session description when the focus is sending invitations. It 185 can occur only once in the document. 187 o The