Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Updated by:6118
Network Working Group                                        R. BrandnerRequest for Comments: 4355                                    Siemens AGCategory: Standards Track                                      L. Conroy                                             Siemens Roke Manor Research                                                              R. Stastny                                                                   Oefeg                                                            January 2006IANA Registration for Enumservices email, fax, mms, ems, and smsStatus of This Memo   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).Abstract   This document registers the Enumservices "email", "fax", "sms",   "ems", and "mms" using the URI schemes 'tel:' and 'mailto:' as per   the IANA registration process defined in the ENUM specificationRFC3761.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................22. Terminology .....................................................33. Email Service Registration ......................................44. Fax Service Registration ........................................45. MMS, EMS, SMS Service ...........................................55.1. Introduction ...............................................55.2. SMS Service Registrations ..................................65.2.1. SMS Service Registration with tel: URI ..............65.2.2. SMS Service Registration with mailto: URI ...........65.3. EMS Service Registrations ..................................75.3.1. EMS Service Registration with tel: URI ..............75.3.2. EMS Service Registration with mailto: URI ...........85.4. MMS Service Registrations ..................................95.4.1. MMS Service Registration with tel: URI ..............95.4.2. MMS Service Registration with mailto: URI ..........106. Security Considerations ........................................117. Acknowledgements ...............................................138. References .....................................................138.1. Normative References ......................................138.2. Informative References ....................................141.  Introduction   ENUM (E.164 Number Mapping,RFC 3761 [2]) is a system that transforms   E.164 numbers [3] into domain names and then uses DNS (Domain Name   Service,RFC 1034 [4]) services like delegation through NS records   and NAPTR records to look up what services are available for a   specific domain name.   This document registers Enumservices according to the guidelines   given inRFC 3761 to be used for provisioning in the services field   of a NAPTR [5] resource record to indicate what class of   functionality a given endpoint offers.  The registration is defined   within the DDDS (Dynamic Delegation Discovery System [6][7][5][8][9])   hierarchy, for use with the "E2U" DDDS Application defined inRFC3761.   The following Enumservices are registered with this document:   "email", "fax", "sms", "ems", and "mms".  These share a common   feature in that they each indicate that the functionality of the   given endpoints and the associated resources are capable of receiving   discrete messages, albeit of different types.   According toRFC 3761, the Enumservice registered must be able to   function as a selection mechanism when choosing one NAPTR resource   record from another.  That means that the registration MUST specifyBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   what is expected when using that very NAPTR record, and the Uniform   Resource Identifier (URI) scheme that is the outcome of the use of   it.   Therefore, an Enumservice acts as a hint, indicating the kind of   service with which the URI constructed using the regexp field is   associated.  There can be more than one Enumservice included within a   single NAPTR; this indicates that there is more than one service that   can be achieved using the associated URI scheme.   The common thread with this set of definitions is that they reflect   the kind of service that the end-user will hope to achieve with the   communication using the associated URI.   The services specified here are intended not to specify the protocol   or even method of connection that must be used to achieve each   service.  Instead they define the kind of interactive behaviour that   an end-user will expect, leaving the end system to decide (based on   policies outside the remit of this specification) how to execute the   service.   Since the same URI scheme may be used for different services (e.g.,   'tel:'), and the same kind of service may use different URI schemes   (e.g., for VoIP 'h323:' and 'tel:' may be used), it is necessary in   some cases to specify the service and the URI scheme used.   The service parameters defined inRFC 3761 allow, therefore, a "type"   and a "subtype" to be specified.  Within this set of specifications,   the convention is assumed that the "type" (being the more generic   term) defines the service and the "subtype" defines the URI scheme.   Even where currently only one URI scheme is associated with a given   service, it should be considered that an additional URI scheme to be   used with this service may be added later.  Thus, the subtype is   needed to identify the specific Enumservice intended.   In this document, there are two URI schemes that are used within the   various services.  These are 'tel:', as specified inRFC 3966 [10]   and 'mailto:', as specified inRFC 2368 [11].2.  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 inBCP 14,RFC 2119 [1].Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 20063.  Email Service Registration   Enumservice Name: "email"   Enumservice Type: "email"   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the remote resource can be      addressed by the associated URI scheme in order to send an email.   Security Considerations:      SeeSection 6.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      None4.  Fax Service Registration   Enumservice Name: "fax"   Enumservice Type: "fax"   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"   URI Scheme: 'tel:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of being contacted to provide a      communication session during which facsimile documents can be      sent.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006      Clients selecting this NAPTR will have support for generating and      sending facsimile documents to the recipient using the Public      Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) session and transfer protocols      specified in [12] and [13].  In short, they will have a fax      program with a local or shared PSTN access over which they can      send faxes.   Security Considerations:      SeeSection 6.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      None5.  MMS, EMS, SMS Service5.1.  Introduction   An ENUM NAPTR indicates ability on the part of the Subscriber to   receive specified communication service (or services) provided via   the contact address (shown in the generated URI).   In the case of MMS, EMS, and SMS services, the capability of these   services is a nested superset; thus, a service supporting MMS can   support also delivery of EMS or SMS message content to a recipient   that is receiving a Multimedia Message, whilst a service supporting   EMS can also deliver SMS message content to a recipient that can   accept receipt of EMS Messages.   Thus, even if a client wants only to generate and send content that   could be carried in an SMS message, the client MAY choose to consider   also NAPTRs holding EMS and/or MMS Enumservices, as these indicate   that the destination can accept EMS and/or MMS messages.  These   services will be able to deliver SMS content to the recipient   address.   Conversely, a client capable of sending MMS messages may choose to   consider also NAPTRs indicating support for EMS or SMS messages   (assuming that the network to which it is connected provides these   services as well, or is capable of providing a gateway to systemsBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   that do provide these services).  In taking this choice, it would   have to "downgrade" its User Interface to allow only generation of   content that conforms to SMS or EMS standards.   These behaviours on the part of the client are purely optional and   are NOT the subject of any protocol standardisation.5.2.  SMS Service Registrations5.2.1.  SMS Service Registration with tel: URI   Enumservice Name: "sms"   Enumservice Type: "sms"   Enumservice Subtypes: "tel"   URI Scheme: 'tel:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the      Short Message Service (SMS) [14].   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      None5.2.2.  SMS Service Registration with mailto: URI   Enumservice Name: "sms"   Enumservice Type: "sms"   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an      email protocol.      SMS content is sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS      23.140 [15]Section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16]Section 4, as an MMS      message.  Within such a message, SMS content is carried as either      a text or application/octet-stream MIME sub-part (see TS 26.140      [16]Section 4.1).   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      None5.3.  EMS Service Registrations5.3.1.  EMS Service Registration with tel: URI   Enumservice Name: "ems"   Enumservice Type: "ems"   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"   URI Scheme: 'tel:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the      Enhanced Message Service (EMS) [14].Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      Note that an indication of EMS can be taken as implying that the      recipient is capable of receiving SMS messages at this address as      well.5.3.2.  EMS Service Registration with mailto: URI   Enumservice Name: "ems"   Enumservice Type: "ems"   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an      email protocol.      EMS content is sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS      23.140 [15]Section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16]Section 4, as an MMS      message.  Within such a message, EMS content is carried as either      a text or application/octet-stream MIME sub-part (see TS 26.140      [16]section 4.1).   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMONBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      None5.4.  MMS Service Registrations5.4.1.  MMS Service Registration with tel: URI   Enumservice Name: "mms"   Enumservice Type: "mms"   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"   URI Scheme: 'tel:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the      Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) [15].   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail, see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      Note that MMS can be used as an alternative to deliver an SMS      RP-DATA RPDU if, for example, the SMS bearer is not supported.  If      an entry includes this Enumservice, then in effect this can be      taken as implying that the recipient is capable of receiving EMS      or SMS messages at this address.  Such choices on the end system      design do have two small caveats; whilst in practice all terminalsBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006      supporting MMS today support SMS as well, it might not necessarily      be the case in the future, and there may be tariff differences in      using the MMS rather than using the SMS or EMS.5.4.2.  MMS Service Registration with mailto: URI   Enumservice Name: "mms"   Enumservice Type: "mms"   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'   Functional Specification:      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an      email protocol.      MMS messages are sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS      23.140 [15]Section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16]Section 4.      Within and between MMS Environments (MMSE, network infrastructures      that support the MultiMedia Service), other pieces of state data      (for example, charging-significant information) are exchanged      between MMS Relay Servers.  Thus, although these servers use SMTP      as the "bearer" for their application exchanges, they map their      internal state to specialised headers carried in the SMTP message      exchanges.  The headers used in such MMSE are described in detail      in [17].   Security Considerations:      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.      However, the general considerations ofSection 6 apply.   Intended Usage: COMMON   Authors:      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)   Any other information the author deems interesting:      The MMS Architecture describes an interface between the MMSE and      "legacy messaging systems" (labelled as MM3) that acceptsBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006      "standard" SMTP messages.  Thus, although the MMS Relay Server      that supports this interface appears as a standard SMTP server      from the perspective of an Internet-based mail server, it acts as      a gateway and translator, adding the internal state data that is      used within and between the MMS Environments.  This mechanism is      described in [17], which also includes references to the      specifications agreed by those bodies responsible for the design      of the MMS.6.  Security Considerations   DNS, as used by ENUM, is a global, distributed database.  Thus, any   information stored there is visible to anyone anonymously.  Whilst   this is not qualitatively different from publication in a Telephone   Directory, it does open data subjects to having "their" information   collected automatically without any indication that this has been   done or by whom.   Such data harvesting by third parties is often used to generate lists   of targets for unrequested information; in short, they are used to   address "spam".  Anyone who uses a Web-archived mailing list is aware   that the volume of "spam" email they are sent increases when they   post to the mailing list.  Publication of a telephone number in ENUM   is no different, and may be used to send "junk faxes" or "junk SMS",   for example.   Many mailing list users have more than one email address and use   "sacrificial" email accounts when posting to such lists to help   filter out unrequested emails sent to them.  This is not so easy with   published telephone numbers; the PSTN E.164 number assignment process   is much more involved, and usually a single E.164 number (or a fixed   range of numbers) is associated with each PSTN access.  Thus,   providing a "sacrificial" phone number in any publication is not   possible.   Due to the implications of publishing data on a globally accessible   database, as a principle, data subjects MUST give their explicit   informed consent to data being published in ENUM.   In addition, they should be made aware that, due to storage of such   data during harvesting by third parties, removal of the data from   publication will not remove any copies that have been taken; in   effect, any publication may be permanent.   However, regulations in many regions will require that data subjects   can at any time request that the data is removed from publication and   that their consent for its publication is explicitly confirmed at   regular intervals.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 11]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   When placing a fax call via the PSTN or a sending a message via the   Public Land Mobile Network, the sender may be charged for this   action.  In both kinds of network, calling or messaging to some   numbers is more expensive than sending to others; both networks have   "premium rate" services that can charge considerably more than a   "normal" call or message destination.  As such, it is important that   end-users be asked to confirm sending the message and that the   destination number be presented to them.  It is the originating   user's choice on whether or not to send a message to this destination   number, but end-users SHOULD be shown the destination number so that   they can make this decision.   Although a fax number, like other E.164 numbers, doesn't appear to   reveal as much identity information about a user as a name in the   format user@host (e.g., an email or SIP address), the information is   still publicly available; thus, there is still the risk of unwanted   communication.   An analysis of threats specific to the dependence of ENUM on the DNS,   and the applicability of DNSSEC [18] to these, is provided inRFC3761 [2].  A thorough analysis of threats to the DNS itself is   covered inRFC 3833 [19].   An email address is a canonical address by which a user is known.   Placing this address in ENUM is comparable to placing a SIP or H.323   address in the DNS.   DNS does not make any policy decisions about the records that it   shares with an inquirer.  All DNS records must be assumed to be   available to all inquirers at all times.  The information provided   within an ENUM NAPTR resource record must, therefore, be considered   to be open to the public, which is a cause for some privacy   considerations.   Therefore, ENUM Subscribers should be made aware of this risk.  Since   it is within the responsibility of the ENUM Subscriber which data is   entered in ENUM, it is within the ENUM Subscriber's control if he   enters email addresses:   1.  allowing inference of private data, e.g., his first and last name   2.  at all   It should also be considered that it is the purpose of public   communication identifiers to be publicly known.  To reduce spam and   other unwanted communication, other means should be made available,   such as incoming message filtering.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 12]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   Some Value Added Service Providers use receipt of a short message to   a given special service telephone number as a trigger to start   delivery of data messages to the calling number.  By sending an SMS   (or, in principle, an EMS or MMS) to one of these special service   numbers, one is entering into a contract to pay for receipt of a set   of messages containing information (e.g., news, sports results, "ring   tones").   Thus, it is very important that the end terminal presents the   destination number to which any message is to be sent using the "sms:   tel", "ems:tel", or "mms:tel" Enumservices, to allow the end-user to   cancel any message before it is sent to one of these numbers.   At present, these systems use the circuit switched network trusted   calling line identifier to identify the destination for the   subsequent charged information messages, and so it is believed that   sending using the "sms:mailto", "ems:mailto", or "mms:mailto"   Enumservices does not have this risk currently.7.  Acknowledgements   Many thanks to Ville Warsta for his close reading of the document and   extracting the right references.  Thanks also to those who are   involved in the parallel effort to specify the requirements for "real   world" ENUM trials resulting in TS 102 172 [20], in which this and   other Enumservices are referenced.8.  References8.1.  Normative References   [1]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement         Levels",RFC 2119,BCP 14, March 1997.   [2]   Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource         Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)         Application (ENUM)",RFC 3761, April 2004.   [3]   ITU-T, "The International Public Telecommunication Number         Plan", Recommendation E.164, May 1997.   [4]   Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES",RFC 1034, November 1987.   [5]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part         Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database",RFC 3403,         October 2002.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 13]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006   [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]  Schulzrinne, H., "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers",RFC 3966,         December 2004.   [11]  Hoffman, P., Masinter, L., and J. Zawinski, "The mailto URL         scheme",RFC 2368, July 1998.   [12]  ITU-T, "Standardization of Group 3 facsimile terminals for         document transmission", Recommendation T.4, April 1999.   [13]  ITU-T, "Procedures for document facsimile transmission in the         general switched telephone network", Recommendation T.30,         April 1999.   [14]  3GPP, "Technical realization of the Short Message Service         (SMS);  (Release5)", 3GPP TS 23.040.   [15]  3GPP, "Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS); Functional         description; Stage 2 (Release 5)", 3GPP TS 23.140.   [16]  3GPP, "Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS); Media formats and         codecs; (Release 5)", 3GPP TS 26.140.   [17]  Gellens, R., "Mapping Between the Multimedia Messaging Service         (MMS) and Internet Mail",RFC 4356, January 2006.8.2.  Informative References   [18]  Arends, R. and et al. , "Protocol Modifications for the DNS         Security Extensions",RFC 4035, March 2005.   [19]  Atkins, D. and R. Austein, "Threat Analysis of the Domain Name         System (DNS)",RFC 3833, August 2004.   [20]  ETSI, "Minimum Requirements for Interoperability of ENUM         Implementations", ETSI TS 102 172, January 2005.Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 14]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006Authors' Addresses   Rudolf Brandner   Siemens AG   Hofmannstr. 51   81359 Munich   Germany   Phone: +49-89-722-51003   EMail: rudolf.brandner@siemens.com   Lawrence Conroy   Siemens Roke Manor Research   Roke Manor   Romsey   United Kingdom   Phone: +44-1794-833666   EMail: lwc@roke.co.uk   Richard Stastny   Oefeg   Postbox 147   1103 Vienna   Austria   Phone: +43-664-420-4100   EMail: Richard.stastny@oefeg.atBrandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 15]

RFC 4355           IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations       January 2006Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions   contained inBCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors   retain all their rights.   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.Intellectual Property   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 inBCP 78 andBCP 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 athttp://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.Acknowledgement   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).Brandner, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 16]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp