One document matched: draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-options-registry-00.txt

Network Working Group                                      M. Westerlund
Internet-Draft                                                  Ericsson
Updates: 5245 (if approved)                                   C. Perkins
Intended status: Standards Track                   University of Glasgow
Expires: July 15, 2011                                  January 11, 2011


 IANA Registry for Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) Options
               draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-options-registry-00

Abstract

   It has been identified that Interactive Connectivity Establishment
   (ICE) is missing a registry for ICE options.  This document defines
   this missing IANA registry.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 15, 2011.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.




Westerlund & Perkins      Expires July 15, 2011                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft            IANA Registry for ICE             January 2011


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     3.1.  ICE Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5







































Westerlund & Perkins      Expires July 15, 2011                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft            IANA Registry for ICE             January 2011


1.  Introduction

   "Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network
   Address Translator (NAT) Traversal for Offer/Answer" [RFC5245]
   defines a concept of ICE Options.  However, the ICE RFC fails to
   create an IANA registry for ICE options.  As there has come into
   existence at least one ICE option, there is need to create the
   registry.

   RFC 5245 says: "ICE provides for extensibility by allowing an offer
   or answer to contain a series of tokens that identify the ICE
   extensions used by that agent.  If an agent supports an ICE
   extension, it MUST include the token defined for that extension in
   the ice-options attribute."

   Thus, as future extensions are defined, these ICE options needs to be
   registered with IANA to ensure non-conflicting identification.  The
   ICE options identifiers are used in signalling between the ICE end-
   points to negotiate extension support.  RFC 5245 defines one method
   of signaling these ICE options, using SDP with Offer/Answer
   [RFC3264].


2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


3.  IANA Considerations

   This document defines a registry for ICE options that can be used in
   SDP "ice-options" attribute or other signalling parameters carrying
   the ICE options.

3.1.  ICE Options

   An ICE option identifier MUST fulfill the ABNF [RFC5234] syntax for
   "ice-option-tag" as specified in [RFC5245].  This syntax is reproduce
   here for simplicity, but the authoritative definition is in the ICE
   RFC:
   ice-option-tag        = 1*ice-char
   ice-char              = ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "/"

   ICE options are of unlimited length by the syntax, however they are
   recommended to be no longer than 20 characters.  This is to reduce
   message sizes and allow for efficient parsing.



Westerlund & Perkins      Expires July 15, 2011                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft            IANA Registry for ICE             January 2011


   Registration of an ICE option is done using the Specification
   Required policy as defined in "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
   Considerations Section in RFCs" [RFC5226].

   A registration request MUST include the following information:

   o  Name of contact person for the registration

   o  Email and Address of the Contact person

   o  Organization or individuals having the change control

   o  The ICE option identifier

   o  Short description of the ICE extension

   o  Reference(s) to the specification defining the ICE option and the
      related extensions


4.  Security Considerations

   As this document defines an IANA registry for an already existing
   concept there are no new security considerations.


5.  Acknowledgements


6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.

   [RFC5245]  Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
              (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
              Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245,
              April 2010.




Westerlund & Perkins      Expires July 15, 2011                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft            IANA Registry for ICE             January 2011


6.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
              June 2002.


Authors' Addresses

   Magnus Westerlund
   Ericsson
   Farogatan 6
   SE-164 80 Kista
   Sweden

   Phone: +46 10 714 82 87
   Email: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com


   Colin Perkins
   University of Glasgow
   School of Computing Science
   Glasgow  G12 8QQ
   United Kingdom

   Email: csp@csperkins.org

























Westerlund & Perkins      Expires July 15, 2011                 [Page 5]