One document matched: draft-meyer-voipeer-terminology-00.txt
Network Working Group D. Meyer
Internet-Draft October 14, 2005
Expires: April 17, 2006
Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering and Interconnect
draft-meyer-voipeer-terminology-00.txt
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 17, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This document defines the terminology that is to be used by the Voice
Over IP Peering and Interconnect (voipeer) Working Group, and should
be used to focus the voipeer Working Group during discussions and
when writing requirements, gap analysis and other solutions oriented
documents.
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. General Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Call Routing Data (CRD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Call Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. PSTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.4. Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5. VoIP Service Provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.6. Carrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.7. Peering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.8. Layer 3 Peering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.9. Layer 5 Peering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.10. VoIP Peering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. ENUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. User ENUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Carrier ENUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
1. Introduction
The term "VoIP Peering" has historically been used to describe a wide
variety of different aspects pertaining to the interconnection of
service provider networks, and to the delivery of SIP call
termination over those interconnections. Further, since VoIP peering
focuses on how to identify and route calls at the application level
("Layer 5"), it does not (necessarily) involve the exchange of packet
routing data or even media sessions. In particular, "layer 5
network" is used here to refer to the interconnection between SIP
servers (as opposed to interconnection at the IP layer). Finally,
the terms "peering" and "interconnect" are used interchangeably
throughout this document.
This document introduces standard terminology for use in
characterizing VoIP interconnection. Note however, that while this
document is primarily targeted at the VoIP interconnect case, the
terminology described here is applicable to those cases in which
service providers interconnect using SIP signaling for real-time or
quasi-real-time communications.
The remainder of this document is organized as follows: Section 2
provides the general context for voipeer, and Section 3 provides the
general definitions for real-time SIP based communication, with focus
on the VoIP interconnect case. Section 4 briefly touches on terms
from ENUM. Finally, Section 5 provides comments on usage.
2. Context
Figure 1 depicts the general VoIP interconnect context in which the
caller uses an E.164 number [ITU.E164.1991] as the "name" of the
called user. Note that this E.164 number is not an address, since at
this point we do not have information about where the named endpoint
is located. In the case shown here, an E.164 number is used as a key
to retrieve a NAPTR [RFC3404] record from the DNS, which in turn
results in a SIP URI. Call routing is then based on this SIP URI.
Note call routing does not depend on the presence of an E.164 number;
the SIP URI can be advertised in various other ways, such as on a web
page. Finally, note that the subsequent lookup steps, namely, look
up of SRV, A, and AAAA records (as well as any routing steps below
that) are outside the scope of voipeer.
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
E.164 number <--- Peer Discovery
|
| <--- ENUM lookup of NAPTR in DNS
|
SIP URI <--- Call Routing Data (CRD)
|
| <--- Service Location (Lookup of SRV in DNS)
|
Hostname <--- VoIP addressing and session establishment
|
| <---- Lookup of A and AAAA in DNS
|
Ip address
|
| <---- Routing protocols, ARP etc
|
Mac-address
Figure 1: VoIP Interconnect Context
Note that voipeer is primarily concerned with the acquisition and use
of the Call Routing Data (CRD) shown in in Figure 1. Importantly,
the CRD can be derived from an E.164 entry, as shown in Figure 1, or
via any other mechanism available to the user.
3. General Definitions
3.1. Call Routing Data (CRD)
Call Routing Data, or CRD, is a SIP URI used to route a (real-time,
voice or other type) call to its termination point.
[ed: do we need a definition of "termination point"?]
3.2. Call Routing
Call routing is the set of processes, rules, and CRD used to route a
VoIP call to its proper (SIP) destination. More generally, it is the
set of processes, rules and CRD used to route a real-time session to
its termination point.
3.3. PSTN
The term "PSTN" refers to the Public Switched Telephone Network. In
particular, the PSTN refers to the collection of interconnected
circuit-switched voice-oriented public telephone networks, both
commercial and government-owned. In general, PSTN terminals are
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
addressed using E.164 numbers, noting that various dial-plans (such
as emergency services dial-plans) may not directly use E.164 numbers.
3.4. Network
For purposes of this document and the voipeer work, a network is
defined to be the set of SIP servers and customers that are
controlled by a single administration.
3.5. VoIP Service Provider
A VoIP service provider is an entity that provides transport of SIP
signaling and possibly media streams for its customers. Such a
service provider may additionally be interconnected with other
service providers (i.e., it may "peer" Section 3.7 with other service
providers). Note that a VoIP service provider may also interconnect
with the PSTN.
3.6. Carrier
The term carrier is defined to be a service provider authorized to
issue E.164 numbers [ITU.E164.1991] for the provisioning of PSTN
service under the authority of a National Regulatory Authority (NRA).
noting also that the term "carrier" has both business and regulator
connontations...
3.7. Peering
While the precise definition of the term "peering" is the subject of
some debate, peering in general refers to the negotiation of
reciprocal interconnection arrangements, settlement-free or
otherwise, between operationally independent service providers.
3.8. Layer 3 Peering
Layer 3 peering refers to interconnection of two service providers
for the purposes of exchanging IP packets. Layer 3 peering is
frequently agnostic to the IP payload, and is frequently achieved
using a routing protocol such as BGP [RFC1771] to exchange the
required routing information.
3.9. Layer 5 Peering
Layer 5 peering refers to interconnection of two service providers
for the purposes of SIP signaling. Note that in the layer 5 peering
case, there is no intervening network. That is, for purposes of this
discussion, there is no such thing as a "Layer 5 Transit Network".
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
3.10. VoIP Peering
VoIP peering is defined to be a layer 5 peering between two VoIP
providers for purposes of routing real-time (or quasi-real time) call
signaling between their respective customers.
4. ENUM
ENUM [RFC3761] defines how the Domain Name System (DNS) can be used
for identifying available services connected to one E.164 number.
4.1. User ENUM
4.2. Carrier ENUM
5. Conclusions
6. Acknowledgments
Many of the definitions were gleaned from detailed discussions on the
voipeer, enum, and sipping mailing lists. Richard Shocky and Jean-
Francois Mule made valuable contributions to early revisions of this
document. Patrik Faltstrom contributed the basis of Figure 1.
7. Security Considerations
This document itself introduces no new security considerations.
However, it is important to note that VoIP interconnect has a wide
variety of security issues that should be considered in documents
addressing both protocol and use case analyzes.
8. IANA Considerations
This document creates no new requirements on IANA namespaces
[RFC2434].
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC3404] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)",
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
RFC 3404, October 2002.
[RFC3761] Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery
System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004.
[ITU.E164.1991]
International Telecommunications Union, "The International
Public Telecommunication Numbering Plan", ITU-
T Recommendation E.164, 1991.
9.2. Informative References
[RFC1771] Rekhter, Y. and T. Li, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4
(BGP-4)", RFC 1771, March 1995.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
Author's Address
David Meyer
Email: dmm@1-4-5.net
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering October 2005
Intellectual Property Statement
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.
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 (2005). 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
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Meyer Expires April 17, 2006 [Page 9]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 19:13:56 |