One document matched: draft-boulton-xcon-userid-00.txt
Network Working Group C. Boulton
Internet-Draft Ubiquity Software Corporation
Intended status: Informational M. Barnes
Expires: April 16, 2007 Nortel
October 13, 2006
A User Identifier for Centralized Conferencing (XCON)
draft-boulton-xcon-userid-00
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 16, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
A conferencing system is defined by "A framework and Data Model for
Centralized Conferencing" and represents a container for
administering and managing all conference related information. The
conference user concept is introduced in the framework to identify
the entity participating in a conference and manipulating
conferencing system related properties. This document defines a
Conference User Identifier and syntax for identifying a specific
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
conference user within a conferencing system. The document also
describes the logical mapping of this conference user identifier to
protocol and signaling interface specific user identifiers.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. User ID Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Conference User Identifier Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Conference User Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
1. Introduction
This document defines a user identifier and syntax to identify a
conference user within a conferencing system. A conferencing system
is defined by "A framework and Data Model for Centralized
Conferencing" [3] and represents a container for administering and
managing all related information ranging from conference policy to
conference instance management. Within a conferencing system it is
useful to have the concept of a conference user. A conference user
identifies the entity participating in a conference and attempting to
manipulate conferencing system related properties.
A centralized conference as defined in [3] is both signaling and
protocol agnostic. However, users interface with the conferencing
system using specific protocol and signaling interfaces. Each of
these protocols/interfaces often define their own user identifier,
which provides a contextual representation of who exactly is
associated with a specific protocol or signaling interface.
This document provides a top level common user identifier to
associate these related protocol and interface user identifiers. It
also provides guidelines on how this conferencing system wide user
identifier can be used to derive a protocol or interface specific
user. The centralised user management allows for control over
uniqueness within a system. It also aids in the creation and
management of conferencing system wide policies.
2. Conventions and Terminology
In this document, BCP 14/RFC 2119 [1] defines the key words "MUST",
"MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
"RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL". In
addition, BCP 15 indicates requirement levels for compliant
implementations.
This document uses the terminology defined in [3] and also defines
the following additional terms:
TODO : TODO.
3. Overview
Each user within a conferencing system is allocated a unique
Conference User Identifier. The conference user identifier is used
in association with the conference object identifier defined in [TBD]
and by the conference control protocol to uniquely identify a
conference user within the scope of a conferencing system. The
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
conference control protocol uses the conference user identifier to
uniquely determine who is issuing commands. Appropriate policies can
then be applied to the requested command.
As with the conference object identifier, a number of supplementary
user identifiers defined in other protocols are used within a
conference instance. Such user identifiers can be associated with
this conference user identifier and enable the conferencing system to
correlate and map these multiple authenticated user identities to a
single global user identifier.
Figure 1 illustrates an example using the conference user identifier
in association with the user identity defined for BFCP and SIP Digest
user identity as defined in RFC3261[2], which would be used when SIP
is the call signaling protocol. It should be noted that a
conferencing system is free to structure such relationships as
required and this information is just included as a guideline that
can be used.
+---------------+
| Conference |
| User |
| Identifier |
+-------+-------+
|
|
|
+---------------+---------------+
| |
+-------+-------+ +-------+-------+
| BFCP | | SIP Digest |
| 'UserID' | | Username |
+---------------+ +-------+-------+
Figure 1: Conference User Identifier
Within a conferencing system, a user is identified by a single
conference user identifier. Any additional conferencing mechanisms
that contain a protocol specific user ID can be associated with the
conference user identifier, as illustrated in Figure 1. This
mechanism allows conferencing systems to manage and relate system
wide user identities in relation to specific conference objects and
helps in the enforcement of system wide policies.
The following example illustrates the representation and
relationships that might occur in a typical conference instance. The
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
table in Figure 2 lists a typical representation of User Identity
hierarchy and association.
+--------------------+--------------------+-------------------+--------------------+
| Conf User ID | BFCP User ID | SIP User ID | H323 User ID |
+--------------------+--------------------+-------------------+--------------------+
| John | HK37ihdaj | 123674 | 928373 |
+--------------------+--------------------+-------------------+--------------------+
Figure 2: User Identity Representation
The information from Figure 2 can then be applied to the
representation introduced in Figure 1. This results in Figure 3.
+--------------+
| Conference |
| User |
| Identifier |
+--------------+
| John |
+------+-------+
|
|
|
+---------------------+---------------------+
| | |
+-------+--------+ +-------+-------+ +--------+-------+
| BFCP User ID | | SIP User ID | | H323 User ID |
+----------------+ +---------------+ +----------------+
| HK37ihdaj | | 123674 | | 928373 |
+----------------+ +-------+-------+ +----------------+
Figure 3: User ID Tree Representation
Further elements can be added to the tree representation in Figure 3
to enable a complete representation of a conference instance within a
conferencing system.
If a conferencing system can guarantee that user identities for
varying protocols can use one unique identifier across the whole
system then this type of mechanism is not required. Some systems
require more complex user identity association. For example, a SIP
User dialing into a Conference might enter using a PIN code using
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
DTMF. The PIN code would then be used to uniquely identify the
conference user within the conferencing system. If a system wide
conference user identifier is used it MUST comply to the syntax
specified in Section 4 and used for various other protocols/
interfaces using the mapping rules defined in Section 3.1.
3.1. User ID Mapping
[Editors Note: Strict mapping rules will be defined once Section 4 is
completed].
4. Conference User Identifier Definition
This section provides the details for the definition of the
Conference User Identifier.
[Editors Note: Discussion is needed to work through the details
including (not exclusively) consideration of the following:
1. How much normative detail do we need to include in this document
for the conference user identifier?
2. Or are the details of the conference user identifier
implementation specific and we just need to provide examples?
3. Does the definition require that the mapping to the user ids for
other protocols be obvious (e.g., visibly derivable or would that
be implementation specific?
].
5. Conference User Distribution
This section details the distribution of the conference user
identifier to the conferencing clients. A typical mode for
distributing the user identifer is out of band during conferencing
client configuration, thus the mechanism is outside the scope of the
centralized conferencing framework and protocols. However, a
conferencing system should also be capable of allocating and
distributing a user identifier during the first signaling interaction
with the conferencing system, such as an initial request for
blueprints or adding a new user to an existing conference.
[Editor's Note: Further details will be added once there is
resolution on some of the previous sections and more details defined
for the conference control protocol.]
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
6. Security Considerations
Security Considerations to be included in later versions of this
document.
7. IANA Considerations
8. Acknowledgments
TODO.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
9.2. Informative References
[2] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A.,
Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP:
Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
[3] Barnes, M., "A Framework and Data Model for Centralized
Conferencing", draft-ietf-xcon-framework-05 (work in progress),
September 2006.
[4] Camarillo, G., "The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)",
draft-ietf-xcon-bfcp-06 (work in progress), December 2005.
[5] Camarillo, G., "Session Description Protocol (SDP) Format for
Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) Streams",
draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bfcp-03 (work in progress), December 2005.
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
Authors' Addresses
Chris Boulton
Ubiquity Software Corporation
Building 3
Wern Fawr Lane
St Mellons
Cardiff, South Wales CF3 5EA
Email: cboulton@ubiquitysoftware.com
Mary Barnes
Nortel
2201 Lakeside Blvd
Richardson, TX
Email: mary.barnes@nortel.com
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft XCON User ID October 2006
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
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Boulton & Barnes Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 9]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 22:54:12 |