draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt		draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-clarifications-04.txt
	Network Working Group R. Sparks		Network Working Group R. Sparks
	Internet-Draft Oracle		Internet-Draft Oracle
	Updates: 3515 (if approved) A. Roach		Updates: 3515 (if approved) A. Roach
	Intended status: Standards Track Mozilla		Intended status: Standards Track Mozilla
	Expires: September 4, 2015 March 3, 2015		Expires: October 24, 2015 April 22, 2015
	Clarifications for the use of REFER with RFC6665		Clarifications for the use of REFER with RFC6665
	draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03		draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-clarifications-04
	Abstract		Abstract
	The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification		The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification
	Framework. That framework was revised by RFC6665. This document		Framework. That framework was revised by RFC6665. This document
	highlights the implications of the requirement changes in RFC6665,		highlights the implications of the requirement changes in RFC6665,
	and updates the definition of the REFER method, RFC3515, to clarify		and updates the definition of the REFER method, RFC3515, to clarify
	and disambiguate the impact of those changes.		and disambiguate the impact of those changes.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	skipping to change at page 1, line 35		skipping to change at page 1, line 35
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on September 4, 2015.		This Internet-Draft will expire on October 24, 2015.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 2, line 13		skipping to change at page 2, line 13
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	3. Use of GRUU is mandatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Use of GRUU is mandatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. Dialog reuse is prohibited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		4. Dialog reuse is prohibited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		5. The 202 response code is deprecated . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	8. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		9. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
			Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	1. Conventions and Definitions		1. Conventions and Definitions
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
	2. Introduction		2. Introduction
	The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification		The SIP REFER method relies on the SIP-Specific Event Notification
	skipping to change at page 4, line 22		skipping to change at page 4, line 22
	target is a GRUU). Such a REFER will be constructed with its Contact		target is a GRUU). Such a REFER will be constructed with its Contact
	header field populated with the dialog's Local URI as specified in		header field populated with the dialog's Local URI as specified in
	section 12 of [RFC3261].		section 12 of [RFC3261].
	As described in section 4.5.2 of [RFC6665], there are cases where a		As described in section 4.5.2 of [RFC6665], there are cases where a
	user agent may fall back to sharing existing dialogs for backwards-		user agent may fall back to sharing existing dialogs for backwards-
	compatibility purposes. This applies to REFER only when the peer has		compatibility purposes. This applies to REFER only when the peer has
	not provided a GRUU as its Contact in the existing dialog (i.e. when		not provided a GRUU as its Contact in the existing dialog (i.e. when
	the peer is a pre-RFC6665 implementation).		the peer is a pre-RFC6665 implementation).
	5. Security Considerations		5. The 202 response code is deprecated
			Section 8.3.1 of [RFC6665] requires that elements do not send a 202
			response code to a subscribe request, but use the 200 response code
			instead. Any 202 response codes received to a subscribe request are
			treated as 200s. These changes also apply to REFER. Specifically,
			an element accepting a REFER request MUST NOT reply with a 202
			response code and MUST treat any 202 responses received as identical
			to a 200 response. Wherever [RFC3515] requires sending a 202
			response code, a 200 response code MUST be sent instead.
			6. Security Considerations
	This document introduces no new security considerations directly.		This document introduces no new security considerations directly.
	The updated considerations in [RFC6665] apply to the implicit		The updated considerations in [RFC6665] apply to the implicit
	subscription created by an accepted REFER request.		subscription created by an accepted REFER request.
	6. IANA Considerations		7. IANA Considerations
	This document has no actions for IANA.		This document has no actions for IANA.
	7. Acknowledgements		8. Acknowledgements
	Christer Holmberg provided the formulation for the final paragraph of		Christer Holmberg provided the formulation for the final paragraph of
	the introduction. Christer Holmberg and Ivo Sedlacek provided		the introduction. Christer Holmberg and Ivo Sedlacek provided
	detailed comments during working group discussion of the document.		detailed comments during working group discussion of the document.
	8. Changelog		9. Changelog
	RFC Editor - please remove this section when formatting this document		RFC Editor - please remove this section when formatting this document
	as an RFC		as an RFC
			-03 to -04
			Added section on deprecating 202.
	-02 to -03		-02 to -03
	Reinforced that the MAY send in-dialog applied no matter what		Reinforced that the MAY send in-dialog applied no matter what
	the remote target URI contained.		the remote target URI contained.
	-01 to -02		-01 to -02
	Tweaked the third paragraph of section 3 per list discussion.		Tweaked the third paragraph of section 3 per list discussion.
	(Note the subject line of that discussion said -explicit-		(Note the subject line of that discussion said -explicit-
	subscription)		subscription)
	-00 to -01		-00 to -01
	Added the 3rd paragraph to the introduction per extensive list		Added the 3rd paragraph to the introduction per extensive list
	discussion		discussion
	draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-05 to draft-ietf-		draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-05 to draft-ietf-
	skipping to change at page 5, line 25		skipping to change at page 6, line 4
	Attempted to improve the accuracy of the Abstract and		Attempted to improve the accuracy of the Abstract and
	Introduction without diluting the essential point of the		Introduction without diluting the essential point of the
	document.		document.
	Added an informative reference to RFC5057.		Added an informative reference to RFC5057.
	Adjusted text to more reflect what RFC6665 (as clarified by		Adjusted text to more reflect what RFC6665 (as clarified by
	draft-roach-sipcore-6665-clarification) actually requires, and		draft-roach-sipcore-6665-clarification) actually requires, and
	added a normative reference to that clarification draft.		added a normative reference to that clarification draft.
	Specifically, the requirement for the _sender_ of a REFER to		Specifically, the requirement for the _sender_ of a REFER to
	use a GRUU as its local targetwas removed.		use a GRUU as its local target was removed.
	Clarified why the explicit-subscription extensions relieve an		Clarified why the explicit-subscription extensions relieve an
	in-dialog REFERer from the 6665 requirements for using GRUU as		in-dialog REFERer from the 6665 requirements for using GRUU as
	its contact in the INVITE dialog.		its contact in the INVITE dialog.
	9. References		10. References
	9.1. Normative References		10.1. Normative References
	[I-D.roach-sipcore-6665-clarification]		[I-D.roach-sipcore-6665-clarification]
	Roach, A., "A clarification on the use of Globally		Roach, A., "A clarification on the use of Globally
	Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the Session Initiation		Routable User Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the Session Initiation
	Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Framework", draft-roach-		Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Framework", draft-roach-
	sipcore-6665-clarification-00 (work in progress), October		sipcore-6665-clarification-00 (work in progress), October
	2014.		2014.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	skipping to change at page 6, line 24		skipping to change at page 6, line 45
	Identification in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",		Identification in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
	RFC 4538, June 2006.		RFC 4538, June 2006.
	[RFC5627] Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User		[RFC5627] Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User
	Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the Session Initiation Protocol		Agent URIs (GRUUs) in the Session Initiation Protocol
	(SIP)", RFC 5627, October 2009.		(SIP)", RFC 5627, October 2009.
	[RFC6665] Roach, A., "SIP-Specific Event Notification", RFC 6665,		[RFC6665] Roach, A., "SIP-Specific Event Notification", RFC 6665,
	July 2012.		July 2012.
	9.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-sipcore-refer-explicit-subscription]		[I-D.ietf-sipcore-refer-explicit-subscription]
	Sparks, R., "Explicit Subscriptions for the REFER Method",		Sparks, R., "Explicit Subscriptions for the REFER Method",
	draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-explicit-subscription-00 (work in		draft-ietf-sipcore-refer-explicit-subscription-00 (work in
	progress), November 2014.		progress), November 2014.
	[RFC4488] Levin, O., "Suppression of Session Initiation Protocol		[RFC4488] Levin, O., "Suppression of Session Initiation Protocol
	(SIP) REFER Method Implicit Subscription", RFC 4488, May		(SIP) REFER Method Implicit Subscription", RFC 4488, May
	2006.		2006.
End of changes. 15 change blocks.
	19 lines changed or deleted		37 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/