Movatterモバイル変換

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                  B. Campbell, Ed.Request for Comments: 7957                                        OracleBCP: 67                                                        A. CooperUpdates:5727                                                      CiscoCategory: Best Current Practice                                 B. LeibaISSN: 2070-1721                                      Huawei Technologies                                                             August 2016DISPATCH-Style Working Groups and the SIP Change ProcessAbstractRFC 5727 defined several processes for the former Real-time   Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) area.  These processes include   the evolution of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and related   protocols, as well as the operation of the DISPATCH and SIPCORE   working groups.  This document updatesRFC 5727 to allow flexibility   for the area and working group structure, while preserving the SIP   change processes.  It also generalizes the DISPATCH working group   processes so that they can be easily adopted by other working groups.Status of This Memo   This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   BCPs is available inSection 2 of RFC 7841.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7957.Campbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 1]

RFC 7957              Update to SIP Change Process           August 2016Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document.  Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as   described in the Simplified BSD License.Table of Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.  DISPATCH-Style Working Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.  Decoupling the SIP Change Process from the RAI Area . . . . .44.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61.  Introduction   [RFC5727] described processes for evolving and maintaining the   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] and related technologies   in the former Real-time Application and Infrastructure (RAI) area.   These processes are collectively known as the "SIP Change Process".   While areas do not normally have "charters" per se,RFC 5727   effectively served as a charter for RAI.  The language inRFC 5727   was tightly bound to the RAI area and to the DISPATCH and SIPCORE   working groups.   In 2015, The RAI area merged with the Applications (APP) area to form   the Applications and Real-Time (ART) area.  This document updatesRFC5727 to remove its dependency on RAI and its working group structure.   The updates in this document do not depend on the names of the new   area, or any specific working group.  Rather, the authors seek to   future-proof the SIP Change Process against future reorganizations.RFC 5727 specified that the DISPATCH working group assesses potential   new work for the area, and determines where such work should occur.   DISPATCH does not itself take on such new work.  The SIPCORE workingCampbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 2]

RFC 7957              Update to SIP Change Process           August 2016   group is responsible for maintenance of SIP.  Other historically RAI   area working groups develop extensions to SIP that do not change the   core protocol, new applications of SIP, and other technologies for   interactive communication among humans.  This document further   generalizes the processes of the DISPATCH working group so that they   can be applied to other areas, or to clusters of technologies within   an area.   This document does not change any other aspect ofRFC 5727.  While   areas and working groups may change over time, the rules and   procedures for changing SIP and other historically RAI protocols   remain the same, until such time that they are updated by future   documents.2.  DISPATCH-Style Working Groups   The DISPATCH working group has proven successful at managing new work   for the RAI and ART areas.  Areas may choose to adopt DISPATCH-like   procedures, either for an entire area, or for technology clusters in   an area or across areas.  A "DISPATCH-Style" working group operates   according to procedures similar to those used for DISPATCH.   This document is not intended to recommend DISPATCH-style groups for   any specific IETF area other than ART.  Different areas have   different needs, and those needs may change over time.  It is up to   the community and respective Area Directors to determine if a   DISPATCH-style group is appropriate for any given situation.   The "DISPATCH-style" includes the following essential elements:   o  The working group evaluates proposals for new work for an area, or      for a well-defined technology cluster.  It acts as a filter for      the area or cluster to determine whether a proposal is a      reasonable use of, or addition to, associated technologies.  This      determination may depend upon established criteria (for example,      the SIP Change Process), the experience and expertise of the      participants, or a combination of the two.   o  The DISPATCH-style working group determines an appropriate venue      for the work.  The venue could be an existing working group.  If      no appropriate group exists, it may develop a charter for a BoF or      a new working group.  The group might also recommend that a      proposal progress as an AD-sponsored individual draft, or even      that a proposal should not be acted upon at the time.Campbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 3]

RFC 7957              Update to SIP Change Process           August 2016   o  The DISPATCH-style working group does not complete the proposed      work.  It may, however, adopt milestones needed to properly      dispatch the work.  For example, it may produce charter text for a      BoF or a new working group, an initial problem statement, or      documentation about why certain work was not pursued.   Nothing in this list prevents existing working groups from directly   adopting new work that reasonably fits their charters, nor does it   prevent new-work proposals from going directly to BoF meetings when   appropriate.  For borderline cases, the decision whether new work   should start in a DISPATCH-style group or elsewhere is made by the   responsible Area Directors and chairs.  Likewise, in cases where an   area has multiple DISPATCH-style groups for different purposes or   technology clusters, deciding which group will handle a particular   proposal is up to the responsible Area Directors and relevant chairs.   The charter of a DISPATCH-style group should make that fact clear,   either by referencing this document, or by directly describing   similar procedures.3.  Decoupling the SIP Change Process from the RAI Area   This document clarifies that the SIP Change Process is not bound to   any particular area or working group structure.  All references to   the RAI area inRFC 5727 should be interpreted as "the cluster of SIP   and closely related application and infrastructure technologies, as   well as other technologies designed primarily for interactive   communication, historically among humans".   While the DISPATCH and SIPCORE working groups are expected to   continue in their current capacities, nothing in the SIP Change   Process prevents their responsibilities from being assigned to other   working groups in the future.   All other aspects of the SIP Change Process are to continue as   described inRFC 5727.4.  Security Considerations   This document discusses the roles and responsibilities of areas and   working groups.  It does not create new security considerations in   the conventional sense.   However, organizational structures come with their own security   considerations.  A DISPATCH-style working group has the potential to   concentrate the control of work for an area or cluster in the hands   of a much smaller set of people than those in the whole area or   cluster.  This could effectively create bottlenecks or roadblocks forCampbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 4]

RFC 7957              Update to SIP Change Process           August 2016   new work in an area or cluster.  Likewise, such a concentration could   reduce the quality of decisions about new work.  Care must be taken   to avoid this risk.  The best mitigation is active participation in   the group by as many people in the area or cluster as possible.5.  References5.1.  Normative References   [RFC5727]  Peterson, J., Jennings, C., and R. Sparks, "Change Process              for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Real-              time Applications and Infrastructure Area",BCP 67,RFC 5727, DOI 10.17487/RFC5727, March 2010,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5727>.5.2.  Informative References   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol",RFC 3261,              DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.   [RFC3427]  Mankin, A., Bradner, S., Mahy, R., Willis, D., Ott, J.,              and B. Rosen, "Change Process for the Session Initiation              Protocol (SIP)",RFC 3427, DOI 10.17487/RFC3427, December              2002, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3427>.Acknowledgements   The authors would like to thank all the previous authors of the SIP   Change Process for their contributions.  Jon Peterson, Cullen   Jennings, and Robert Sparks authoredRFC 5727.  That RFC obsoleted   [RFC3427], which was in turn written by Allison Mankin, Scott   Bradner, Rohan Mahy, Dean Willis, Brian Rosen, and Joerg Ott.   The authors additionally thank the present and past chairs of   DISPATCH and SIPCORE, as well as all the participants in the former   RAI area since its inception.Campbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 5]

RFC 7957              Update to SIP Change Process           August 2016Authors' Addresses   Ben Campbell (editor)   Oracle   Email: ben@nostrum.com   Alissa Cooper   Cisco   Email: alcoop@cisco.com   Barry Leiba   Huawei Technologies   Phone: +1 646 827 0648   Email: barryleiba@computer.org   URI:http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/Campbell, et al.          Best Current Practice                 [Page 6]