1. - 0 - IANA Registration for ENUMservice Mobile Web draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb-01 Aug. 5. 2005 Jongyun Ra, Sungwoo Shin, Yongwan Ju, Weon Kim National Internet Development Agency of Korea Lawrence Conroy Roke Manor Research Ltd

2. - 1 - Background o As the market of mobile telephony service has kept growing up, the number of mobile internet users has been gradually increasing Oceania America Africa Asia Europe 2003 Mobile Subscriber from ITU Reports Unit : K 559,206.6 442,838.4 293,498.6 50,962.7 17,264.6 1,367,518.1 o In Korea, the number of mobile internet users has reached nearly 7,180K (23% of total Internet users in Korea) o Mobile ENUM usage will be of high importance according to its convenience and portability; the number of mobile devices with Internet access that can take advantage of the convenience may well outweigh those with fixed connectivity

3. - 2 - Abstract o This document registers the ENUMservice ‘mobileweb’ using the URI scheme ‘http:’, ‘https:’ as per the IANA registration process defined in the ENUM specification RFC3761 o Mobile webpages are smaller and simpler than web pages for general use; the mobile webpages are designed to fit within the pocket-sized display of mobile terminals, and to reflect the ‘long pipes’ by which these terminals are connected. o This ENUMservice indicates that the resource identified by the associated URI is capable of being a source of information through a mobile webpage. o There are various services that can be associated with E.164 number used in ENUM. Some RFC documents define types, subtypes and URI schemes for registering some of them as ENUMservices - RFC3762(h.323), RFC3764(sip), RFC3953(presence), RFC4002(web and ft)

4. - 3 - General Web vs Mobile Web General WebMobile WebNote Main Terminal Desktop, LaptopCellular(Mobile) Phone - Access Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator, ….. Mobile Browser for WAP, ME or i-mode - Major Mark-up Language HTML WAP : WML, ME : m-HTML, i-mode : c-HTML - Transport Protocols HTTP(S) WAP : WSP / WTP↔HTTP(S) ME/i-mode : HTTP(S) - Network Band/Latency Broad / ShortNarrow / Long - Mobile web service registration not described in RFC4002

5. - 4 - WAPMEi-mode Major Markup Language WMLm-HTMLc-HTML Protocol Transition (server to client) HTTP→WSP/WTP, TCP →WDP, IP→Bearer Wired →Wireless TCP →TL IP →PMAP →CallCtl Wired →Wireless Leading Organization WAP Forum (Ericsson, Nokia, ….350 companies) Microsoft, Qualcomm W3C, NTT Docomo Implementation Necessities WAP Gateway- M-PGW, PPM WAP vs ME vs i-mode

6. - 5 - WAP vs ME vs i-mode(cont’d) Device WSP WTP WTLS WDP Bearer WAP G/W WSP WTP WTLS WDP Bearer HTTP SSL TCP IP Web server HTTP SSL TCP IP WAP (1.x) WML Page ME Interworking Function TCP IP TCP IP Web server HTTP SSL TCP IP m-HTML Page Wired Wireless Terminal HTTP SSL/TLS TCP IP Wireless Terminal HTTP TLS TL CallCtl Wireless M-PGW TLS IP(PMAP) Wired TLS IP Wired Web server HTTP TLS TCP IP i-mode PPM CallCtl Wireless IP(PMAP) Wired TLTCP cHTML Page WML Page m-HTML Page cHTML Page cHTML Page

7. - 6 - Mobile Web Environment “E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://www.ibm.com!” “E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!” +82-2-2186-4500 General WebMobile Web URIshttp://www.ibm.comhttp://m.ibm.com Page Views TerminalsDesktop / LaptopCellular(Mobile) Phone How to distinguish general web from mobile web ? The standard described in RFC 4002 can not cover mobile web at all RFC 4002

8. - 7 - Mobile Web Environment(cont’d) WAP ME i-mode Terminals URIhttp://w.ibm.com http://m.ibm.com http://i.ibm.com Cellular(Mobile) Phone “E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://w.ibm.com!” “E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!” “E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://i.ibm.com!” +82-2-2186-4500 How to distinguish the protocol for mobile webpage from another protocol? WAP Support ME Support i-mode support RFC 4002

9. - 8 - Draft Proposals o The ENUMservice registration used by a mobile web must be classified according to the protocol architecture that mobile web uses; it needs to use another ENUMservice registration from that specified in RFC 4002 o There are two choices of ENUMservice registration of mobile web; these are ‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’ and ‘Uniform Mobile Web Service Registration’ o ‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’ uses ENUMservice Type ‘mobileweb’ and different ENUMservice Subtypes according to the mobile web protocol architectures(WAP, ME, i-mode) o ‘Uniform Mobile Web Service Registration’ uses ENUMservice Type ‘mobileweb’ but does not use any ENUMservice Subtype

10. - 9 - Draft Proposals(cont’d) ENUMservices mobileweb ‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’ Enumservice Name: "mobileweb" Enumservice Type: "mobileweb" Enumservice Subtype: "wap", "me", "imode" URI Scheme: 'http:', 'https' Functional Specification: This ENUMservice indicates that the associated resource identified by URI scheme is a mobile webpage Example : “E2U+mobileweb:me” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!”

11. - 10 - Draft Proposals(cont’d) 2. What if the protocols of mobile web service are unified and integrated to one(e.g WAP2 or other) in the future ? Enumservice Name: "mobileweb" Enumservice Type: "mobileweb" Enumservice Subtype: N/A URI Scheme: 'http:', 'https' Functional Specification: This ENUMservice indicates that the associated resource identified by URI scheme is a mobile webpage Example : “E2U+mobileweb” “!^.*$!http://mobile.ibm.com!” 1.What if the mobile web service is provided using a same URI regardless of the protocols of mobile web service? (namely, mobile web server is intelligent and can branch connection properly) So, this draft proposes ‘Uniform Mobile Web Service Registration’

12. - 11 - Conclusion RFC 4002draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb General web registration Mobile web registration

13. - 12 - Thank you