MMUSIC WG R. Mahy Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. Expires: December 30, 2004 Jul 2004 Remote Call Control via Mbus and SIP draft-mahy-mmusic-mbus-remotecc-00.txt Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. 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 December 30, 2004. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. Abstract Mbus (Message Bus for Local Coordination) was designed with remote call control in mind as an Mbus profile. This document discusses changes necessary to the long abandoned call control profile to address recent requrirement, and conditions of use to make the core Mbus appropriate for use among SIP systems on the Internet. Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Mbus remote call control Jul 2004 Table of Contents 1. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Proposed changes to the Mbus call control profile . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 6 Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Mbus remote call control Jul 2004 1. Conventions 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 [2]. 2. Introduction A long-standing charter item of the SIP and SIPPING working groups was to design extensions to SIP [1] for . In this vein, remote call control [5], the cooperation of a handful of loosely coupled user agents was extensively discussed, and several suggestions investigated. Mbus (Message Bus for Local Coordination) - RFC 3259 [3], is a lightweight message-oriented coordination protocol designed for inter-application communication. Mbus was designed to run primarily over IP multicast, but also runs over unicast UDP datagrams. Unfortunately Mbus was not designed to work in settings where the Mbus applications are geographically local, but not topologically local. (For example, a mobile phone with IP connectivity could be used as a remote control for a SIP-based video conferencing system which happens to be in the same room, but are in very different networks and addressing realms). Mbus control streams setup via SIP and SDP [9] addresses many of these limitations. This companion document evaluates the possibility of resurrecting the long expired . 3. Proposed changes to the Mbus call control profile The expired call control profile has many events for monitoring status which are a close duplicate of the dialog package [6], which is more expressive in a SIP environment. In order to get the best of both worlds, the commands and events in the current profile should be split into two different profiles. Note that this also can dramatically improve the congestion safety of the overall solution, as SIP message over 1300 bytes MUST be sent over congestion-safe transports such as TCP. The following list proposes a refactoring of the control primitives listed in the call control profile. Several commands are combined or eliminated. In addition, four new commands are added which complete a transfer, join two parties, and add and delete parties in an adhoc conference. Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Mbus remote call control Jul 2004 make-call (sends an INVITE) end-call (sends a BYE, CANCEL, or 603 Declined as appropriate) accept (accepts an incoming call) alert (returns a 180 Ringing provisional response) - is this needed? reject (reject an incoming call with a specific response/reason) move (redirect or single-step transfer a call to a specific target URI) complete-transfer (replaces two active or held calls with one call directly between to two targets -- REFER 1st call to INVITE with Replaces the 2nd call) hold (invoke the locally defined hold mechanism) retrieve (retrieve a call from hold) join (merge two calls into one conference) add-party (add a party to a conference) drop-party (remove a party from a conference) In addition to these changes there are some additional features for consideration that should probably be in separate profiles. For example, setting volume setting, selected audio device, and Do Not Disturb or Forwarding status. It is unclear if Do Not Disturb should be configured via Mbus or via a presence [7]publication [8]. 4. Security Considerations To Be Written. 5. IANA Considerations This document introduces no requirements for IANA. 6 Normative References [1] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M. and E. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002. [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [3] Ott, J., Perkins, C. and D. Kutscher, "A Message Bus for Local Coordination", RFC 3259, April 2002. [4] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998. [5] Mahy, R., "Remote Call Control in SIP using the REFER method and Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Mbus remote call control Jul 2004 the session-oriented dialog package", draft-mahy-sip-remote-cc-01 (work in progress), February 2004. [6] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An INVITE Inititiated Dialog Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-sipping-dialog-package-04 (work in progress), February 2004. [7] Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-simple-presence-10 (work in progress), January 2003. [8] Niemi, A., "An Event State Publication Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-sip-publish-04 (work in progress), May 2004. [9] Mahy, R., "Setting up Mbus Control Sessions with SIP and SDP", draft-mahy-mmusic-mbus-sdp-00.txt (work in progress), July 2004. Author's Address Rohan Mahy Cisco Systems, Inc. 5617 Scotts Valley Drive, Suite 200 Scotts Valley, CA 95066 USA EMail: rohan@cisco.com Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Mbus remote call control Jul 2004 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 (2004). 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. Mahy Expires December 30, 2004 [Page 6]