MARTINI WG Interim 2010-04-29 draft-kaplan-martini-with-olive-00 Hadriel Kaplan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Re-INVITE Handling draft-camarillo-sipping-reinvite-00.txt
Advertisements

SIP Session-ID draft-kaplan-sip-session-id-02 Hadriel Kaplan.
SIP Secure Call-ID draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 Hadriel Kaplan.
MARTINI WG Interim draft-ietf-martini-reqs-04 John Elwell Hadriel Kaplan (editors)
August 2, 2005SIPPING WG IETF 63 ETSI TISPAN ISDN simulation services Roland Jesske Denis Alexeitsev Miguel Garcia-Martin.
Indication of support for keep- alive draft-holmberg-sip-keep-03 Christer Holmberg
SIP Interconnect Guidelines draft-hancock-sip-interconnect-guidelines-02 David Hancock, Daryl Malas.
Rfc4474bis-01 IETF 89 (London) STIR WG Jon & Cullen.
July 13, 2006SIPPING WG IETF 66Slide # 1 ETSI TISPAN call completion services (draft-poetzl-sipping-call-completion-00) Roland
THIS IS THE WAY ENUM Variants Jim McEachern Carrier VoIP Standards Strategy THIS IS.
User Profile Framework draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework-00.txt Dan Petrie
CST Computer Networks NAT CST 415 4/10/2017 CST Computer Networks.
SIP Working Group Stuff Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems
9,825,461,087,64 10,91 6,00 0,00 8,00 SIP Identity Usage in Enterprise Scenarios IETF #64 Vancouver, 11/2005 draft-fries-sipping-identity-enterprise-scenario-01.txt.
GRUU Mechanism Jonathan Rosenberg. Status Draft-rosenberg-sipping-gruu-reqs-01 defines the problem Draft-rosenberg-sip-gruu submitted with proposed solution.
Rohan Mahy draft-ietf-sip-join and Semantics of REFER.
1 SIP WG meeting 73rd IETF - Minneapolis, MN, USA November, 2008 Return Routability Check draft-kuthan-sip-derive-00 Jiri
ENUM? “ Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM or Enum, from TElephone NUmber Mapping) is a suite of protocols to unify the telephone numbering system E.164 with.
1 © NOKIA 1999 FILENAMs.PPT/ DATE / NN SIP Service Architecture Markus Isomäki Nokia Research Center.
Explicit Subscriptions for REFER draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-explicit-subscription-00 SIPCORE – IETF90 Robert Sparks.
IETF 77 MARTINI WG draft-ietf-martini-reqs-02 John Elwell Hadriel Kaplan (editors)
November 2005IETF64 - ECRIT1 Emergency Service Identifiers draft-ietf-sipping-sos-01 draft-schulzrinne-sipping-service-01 Henning Schulzrinne Columbia.
PSAP Callback draft-ietf-ecrit-psap-callback Phone BCP Status Usage Scenarios.
7/6/20061 Speermint Use Case for Cable IETF 66 Yiu L. Lee JULY 2006.
1 SPEERMINT Use Cases for Cable IETF 66 Montreal 11 JULY 2006 Presented by Yiu L. Lee.
Draft-elwell-sipping- redirection-reason-00 Author: John Elwell
Security, NATs and Firewalls Ingate Systems. Basics of SIP Security.
SIP INFO Event Framework (draft-kaplan-sip-info-events-00) Hadriel Kaplan Christer Holmberg 70th IETF, Vancouver, Canada.
SIP working group IETF#70 Essential corrections Keith Drage.
Patrik Fältström. ITU Tutorial Workshop on ENUM. Feb 8, 2002, Geneva Explanation of ENUM (RFC 2916) Patrik Fältström Area Director, Applications Area,
An end-to-end usage of the IPv6 flow label
STIR In-Band Signature Transport draft-kaplan-stir-ikes-out-00 Hadriel Kaplan.
Caller Prefs and Friends Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Making SIP NAT Friendly Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
March 25, 2009SIPPING WG IETF-741 A Batch Notification Extension for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) draft-johnston-sipping-batch-notify-00 Alan.
1/7 Clarification of Privacy Mechanism for SIP draft-munakata-sipping-privacy-clarified-00 Mayumi Munakata (NTT) Shida Schubert (NTT) IETF67 SIPPING 1.
VERMOUTH for MARTINI SIP MARTINI Variant of 'Event-package for Registrations‘ for Managed Open-ended Username Target Handling (VERMOUTH) draft-kaplan-martini-vermouth-00.
SIP PUBLISH Method Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
- 1 -P. Kyzivatdraft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 Reg Event Package Extensions draft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 IETF64 Nov-2005.
Open-plan Local-number Identifier Values for Enterprises (OLIVE) draft-kaplan-martini-with-olive-02 Hadriel Kaplan.
March 20, 2007BLISS BOF IETF-681 Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Changes in -06 Editorial as a result of RFC-ED early copy experiment.
SIP file directory draft-garcia-sipping-file-sharing-framework-00.txt draft-garcia-sipping-file-event-package-00.txt draft-garcia-sipping-file-desc-pidf-00.txt.
July 28, 2009BLISS WG IETF-751 Shared Appearance of a SIP AOR draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-03 Alan Johnston Mohsen Soroushnejad Venkatesh Venkataramanan.
Call Completion using BFCP draft-roach-sipping-callcomp-bfcp IETF 67 – San Diego November 7, 2006.
History-Info header and Support of target-uri Solution Requirements Mary Barnes Francois Audet SIPCORE.
GIN with Literal AoRs for SIP in SSPs (GLASS) draft-kaplan-martini-glass-00 Hadriel Kaplan.
Consent-based Communications draft-ietf-sipping-consent-framework-01.txt draft-ietf-sipping-consent-reqs-00.txt
Andrew Allen ROUTING OUT OF DIALOG REQUESTS draft-allen-dispatch-routing-out-of-dialog-request-01 Dispatch IETF 92 March 23 rd 2015.
76rd IETF - Hiroshima, Japan I. M. draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-csc-02.
Globally Identifiable Number (GIN) Registration Adam Roach draft-martini-roach-gin-01 IETF 77 – Anaheim, CA, USA March 22, 2010.
How to make an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) using an OzML script This slideshow is intended to be a great explanation on how to develop an Interactive.
Location Routing Function Requirements Hadriel Kaplan
SIP connection tracking
THIS IS THE WAY ENUM Variants Jim McEachern
sip-identity-04 Added new response codes for various conditions
IP-NNI Joint Task Force Status Update
Phone numbers and dial strings
draft-ietf-simple-message-session-09
Request-URI Param Delivery
Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft
Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) draft-johnston-bliss-mla-req-00.
Chris Wendt, David Hancock (Comcast)
IP-NNI Joint Task Force Status Update
SIP URI Service Discovery using DNS-SD draft-lee-sip-dns-sd-uri-02
call completion services
draft-bryan-sipping-p2p
IP Interconnection Profile
Emergency Calling Services (Calls for police, fire, ambulance, etc.)
Presentation transcript:

MARTINI WG Interim draft-kaplan-martini-with-olive-00 Hadriel Kaplan

The Problem Draft-gin handles E.164 How do we handle: sip:1234;ext=567;phone- Perceived problems: –Non-E.164s are not globally unique, so draft-gin wont work –Cant expand Contact-URI automagically

The Solution Bulk REGISTER any provisioned AoR, as if the PBX had separately Registered for each one Contact-routing a la RFC3261 still works –If it would have worked for explicit REGISTERs The Contact-URI expansion is the provisioned AoR user portion –The same that would be provisioned for a separate REGISTER

Example PBX does a draft-gin REGISTER SSP has provisioning for INVITE to follows rfc3261 OriginatorSSPPBX INVITE INVITE REGISTER sip:ssp.com To: Contact:

Perceived Problems dont apply Draft-gin really did Register globally unique AoRs –E.g., So now were bulk Registering other globally unique AoRs, scoped to the Registered domain (ssp.com) –Just like RFC 3261 would do for any AoR

Comparison with loose-route Draft-gin/olive follows what happens today for normal Subscribers and for Peering –In both cases, the Req-uri host portion identifies the target host/domain Draft-olive is the loose-route model, except: –Instead of the user portion in the req-uri and the PBXs target IP in a Route header, theyre in one spot: the Request-URI –Draft-olive only covers AoRs of the Registered-to domain (more on that later)

Open Issues and Topics for Discussion/Yelling

What about Question: –How does the PBX know the call was for and not for (if both are handled) Answer: it wont –It wouldnt have in rfc3261 either, if one REGISTER for did more –Really the call is being re-targeted to – and we have hist-info for figuring out the original target, right?

Other solutions for 1.The PBX can REGISTER to ssp.co.ca –By definition it knows about ssp.co.ca, so it can REGISTER to ssp.co.ca separately 2.Or we can define a new URI user parameter named user-context: –Why is this legit? Same thing as phone- context really, just for any alphanumeric

Local Numbers Technically RFC 3966 defines Local Numbers –The phone-context param defines the scope of the user portion, and the users and any other params are only known to the authority of that context In practice, things arent that simple –the Local-Number syntax is only followed in specific cases; e.g., only within the SSP –the dial-plan and knowledge of params is not consistently or fully in one spot –theres an expired draft for P-Private-Network-Indication, tagging incoming requests as belonging to a specific private context –the scoping model of RFC 3966 creates two tiers of scoping: URI-user and URI level –In short: its a mess

A straw-man for how to handle it How would this work if the IP-PBX sent separate, explicit REGISTERs? –In Martini we only care about IP-PBX case –We need a way to REGISTER for a Local-Number I can only see two ways it could have explicitly REGISTERed for a Local-Number: 1.It REGISTERed to a specific Domain: e.g., sip:enterprise.com or sip:enterprise.priv.ssp.com 2.It REGISTERed the AoR: e.g.,

Straw-man continued… The first way (Register to an explicit domain) doesnt need a new draft –Just have the IP-PBX REGISTER to that domain, separately from public numbers –IP-PBX uses a contact param to segregate inbound requests, if thats an issue The second way (Register the AoR) is what draft-olive describes –It can just re-use the draft-gin REGISTER, because theres no name collision or confusion, so long as the whole user portion remains intact to the IP-PBX

What this means… The Request-URI reaching the PBX, and presumably any coming from it for a private plan, would be expressed as a rfc3966 Local-Number Is that reasonable? –I think so – it has to be distinguished somehow, even in a loose-route model –It could be done with yet-another-header (e.g., P- Private-Network-Indication), but what would we set the Request-URI to anyway?

Other Open Issues Reg-event handling –Cant really do normal reg-event for Local-Numbers – all usernames arent known –Need a Bulk-AoR syntax/semantics for registration state What to do about Local-Number user parameters –Some are processed by SSP, some by PBX –In theory only the authority of the phone-context knows what to do with them, but who is that authority??