ENUM Working Group J. Livingood Internet-Draft Comcast Cable Communications Expires: May 12, 2007 P. Pfautz AT&T R. Stastny Oefeg November 2006 The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application for Infrastructure ENUM draft-ietf-enum-infrastructure-03 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 May 12, 2007. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Abstract This document defines a use case as well as a proposal for a parallel namespace to “e164.arpa” as defined in RFC3761, to be used for Infrastructure ENUM purposes. Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2007 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Infrastructure ENUM November 2006 Table of Contents 1. Terminology....................................................2 2. Introduction...................................................2 3. IANA Considerations............................................3 4. DNS Root for Infrastructure ENUM...............................3 5. Security and Privacy Considerations............................3 6. Acknowledgements...............................................4 7. References.....................................................4 7.1 Normative References.......................................4 7.2 Informative References.....................................4 Authors' Addresses................................................5 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements....................5 1. Terminology 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 BCP 14, RFC-2119. 2. Introduction ENUM (E.164 Number Mapping, RFC 3761 [1]) is a system that transforms E.164 numbers [2] into domain names and then uses the DNS (Domain Name Service) [3] to discover NAPTR records that specify what services are available for a specific domain name. ENUM as originally defined was based on the end-user opt-in principle. While this has great potential to foster new services and end-user choice in the long-term, the current requirements for IP- based interconnection of Voice over IP (VoIP) domains require the provisioning of all allocated or served (hosted) numbers of a participating service provider, without the need for individual users to opt-in or not. This is particularly important if Infrastructure ENUM is used for number portability applications, for example. In addition, while it is possible that service providers could mandate that their users opt-in into e164.arpa through end-user contract terms and conditions, there are substantial downsides to such an approach. Thus, for all these reasons and many others, ENUM for end-user provisioning is ill-suited for use by service providers for the interconnection of VoIP domains. As VoIP evolves and becomes pervasive, E.164-addressed telephone calls need not necessarily traverse the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). Therefore, VoIP service providers have an interest Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2006 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Infrastructure ENUM November 2006 in using ENUM, on a so-called "Infrastructure" basis, to keep VoIP traffic on IP networks on an end-to-end basis, both within and between service provider domains. The requirements for Infrastructure ENUM are provided in an ENUM Working Group document, Infrastructure ENUM Requirements [4]. This document defines that Infrastructure ENUM be implemented by means of a parallel namespace to e164.arpa dedicated to Infrastructure ENUM, in a domain which is to be determined. Infrastructure ENUM Tier 2 resource records in the Infrastructure ENUM tree would be controlled by the service provider that is providing services to a given E.164 number, generally referred to in various nations as the "carrier of record". The definition of who controls a given E.164 number is a national matter or is defined by the entity controlling the numbering space. 3. IANA Considerations IANA has created a registry for Enumservices as originally specified in RFC 2916 and revised in RFC 3761. Enumservices registered with IANA are valid for Infrastructure ENUM as well as end-user ENUM. 4. Zone Apex for Infrastructure ENUM The domain name chosed for infrastructure ENUM and any parent domains must be hosted on name servers that have performance characteristics and supporting infrastructure which is comparable to those deployed for the Internet root name servers. Those name servers for Infrastructure ENUM should be configured and operated according to the guidelines described in RFC 2870. 5. Security and Privacy Considerations Since Infrastructure ENUM is also implemented on the public Internet, the same security considerations apply as noted in RFC 3761. In addition, since there is no opt-in for end-users, personally- identifiable information (PII) must not be disclosed for any end- user. Thus, the information provided in the NAPTR records must not disclose any PII about the end-user such as a name in user-info. This can be achieved, for example, by entering the information in the format sip:@provider.example, mailto:@provider.example or sip:@provider.example. Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2006 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Infrastructure ENUM November 2006 6. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Lawrence Conroy, Patrik Faltstrom, Michael Haberler, Otmar Lendl, Steve Lind, Alexander Mayrhofer, Jim Reid, and Richard Shockey for their helpful discussion of this draft and the concept of Infrastructure ENUM. 7. References 7.1 Normative References [1] Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004. [2] ITU-T, "The International Public Telecommunication Number Plan", Recommendation E.164, May 1997. [3] Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES", RFC 1034, November 1987. [4] Lind, S., Pfautz, P., "Infrastructure ENUM Requirements", draft- enum-infrastructure-requirements-01, March 2006. (work-in-progress) [5] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database", RFC 3403, October 2002. [6] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part One: The Comprehensive DDDS", RFC 3401, October 2002. [7] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Two: The Algorithm", RFC 3402, October 2002. [8] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)", RFC 3404, October 2002. [9] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Five: URI.ARPA Assignment Procedures", RFC 3405, October 2002. [10] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. [11] Faltstrom, P., "E.164 number and DNS", RFC 2916, September 2000. 7.2 Informative References Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2006 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Infrastructure ENUM November 2006 Authors' Addresses Jason Livingood Comcast Cable Communications 1500 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 USA Phone: +1-215-981-7813 Email: jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com Penn Pfautz AT&T 200 S. Laurel Ave Middletown, NJ 07748 USA Phone: +1-732-420-4962 Email: ppfautz@att.com Richard Stastny Oefeg Postbox 147 1103 Vienna Austria Phone: +43-664-420-4100 Email: Richard.stastny@oefeg.at Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements 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 Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2006 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Infrastructure ENUM November 2006 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 (2006). 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. Livingood, et. al. Expires May 12, 2006 [Page 6]