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:8262
Network Working Group                                       G. CamarilloRequest for Comments: 5368                                      EricssonCategory: Standards Track                                       A. Niemi                                                              M. Isomaki                                                                   Nokia                                                        M. Garcia-Martin                                                                Ericsson                                                            H. Khartabil                                                      Ericsson Australia                                                            October 2008Referring to Multiple Resources in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Status 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.Abstract   This document defines extensions to the SIP REFER method so that it   can be used to refer to multiple resources in a single request.   These extensions include the use of pointers to Uniform Resource   Identifier (URI) lists in the Refer-To header field and the   "multiple-refer" SIP option-tag.Table of Contents1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23.  Overview of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34.  The multiple-refer SIP Option-Tag  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45.  Suppressing REFER's Implicit Subscription  . . . . . . . . . .46.  URI-List Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57.  Behavior of SIP REFER-Issuers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68.  Behavior of REFER-Recipients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69.  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .710. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1011. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1012. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1012.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1012.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 20081.  IntroductionRFC 3261 (SIP) [RFC3261] is extended byRFC 3515 [RFC3515] with a   REFER method that allows a user agent (UA) to request a second UA to   send a SIP request to a third party.  For example, if Alice is in a   call with Bob, and decides Bob needs to talk to Carol, Alice can   instruct her SIP UA to send a REFER request to Bob's UA providing   Carol's SIP Contact information.  Assuming Bob has given it   permission, Bob's UA will attempt to call Carol using that contact.   That is, it will send an INVITE request to that contact.   A number of applications need to request this second UA to initiate   transactions towards a set of destinations.  In one example, the   moderator of a conference may want the conference server to send BYE   requests to a group of participants.  In another example, the same   moderator may want the conference server to INVITE a set of new   participants.   We define an extension to the REFER method so that REFER requests can   be used to refer other user agents (such as conference servers) to   multiple destinations.  In addition, this mechanism uses the   suppression of the REFER method implicit subscription specified inRFC 4488 [RFC4488].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   [RFC2119] and indicate requirement levels for compliant   implementations.   This document reuses the following terminology defined inRFC 3261   [RFC3261]:   o  User Agent (UA)   o  User Agent Client (UAC)   o  User Agent Server (UAS)   This document defines the following new terms:   REFER-Issuer:  a user agent issuing a REFER request.   REFER-Recipient:  an entity receiving a REFER request and forwarding      a SIP request to a number of REFER-Targets.  The REFER-Recipient      is typically a network entity, such as a URI-list server, that      acts as a UAS for REFER requests and as a UAC for other SIP      requests.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   REFER-Target:  a UA of the intended final recipient of a SIP request      generated by the REFER-Recipient.3.  Overview of Operation   This document describes an application of URI-list services [RFC5363]   that allows a URI-list service to receive a SIP REFER request   containing a list of targets.  The URI-list service invokes the   requested SIP method to each of the targets contained in the list.   This type of URI-list service is referred to as a REFER-Recipient   throughout this document.   This document defines an extension to the SIP REFER method specified   inRFC 3515 [RFC3515] that allows a SIP UAC to include a URI list as   specified inRFC 4826 [RFC4826] of REFER-Targets in a REFER request   and send it to a REFER-Recipient.  The REFER-Recipient creates a new   SIP request for each entry in the URI list and sends it to each   REFER-Recipient.   The URI list that contains the list of targets is used in conjunction   withRFC 5364 [RFC5364] to allow the sender indicate the role (e.g.,   'to', 'cc', or anonymous) in which the REFER-Target is involved in   the signalling.   We represent multiple targets of a REFER request using a URI list as   specified inRFC 4826 [RFC4826].  A REFER-Issuer that wants to refer   a REFER-Recipient to a set of destinations creates a SIP REFER   request.  The Refer-To header contains a pointer to a URI list, which   is included in a body part, and an option-tag in the Require header   field: "multiple-refer".  This option-tag indicates the requirement   to support the functionality described in this specification.   When the REFER-Recipient receives such a request, it creates a new   request per REFER-Target and sends them, one to each REFER-Target.   This document does not provide any mechanism for REFER-Issuers to   find out about the results of a REFER request containing multiple   REFER-Targets.  Furthermore, it does not provide support for the   implicit subscription mechanism that is part of the SIP REFER method.   The way REFER-Issuers are kept informed about the results of a REFER   is service specific.  For example, a REFER-Issuer sending a REFER   request to invite a set of participants to a conference can discover   which participants were successfully brought into the conference by   subscribing to the conference state event package specified inRFC4575 [RFC4575].Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 20084.  The multiple-refer SIP Option-Tag   We define a new SIP option-tag for the Require and Supported header   fields: "multiple-refer".   A user agent including the "multiple-refer" option-tag in a Supported   header field indicates compliance with this specification.   A user agent generating a REFER with a pointer to a URI list in its   Refer-To header field MUST include the "multiple-refer" option-tag in   the Require header field of the REFER.5.  Suppressing REFER's Implicit Subscription   REFER requests with a single REFER-Target establish implicitly a   subscription to the refer event.  The REFER-Issuer is informed about   the result of the transaction towards the REFER-Target through this   implicit subscription.  As described inRFC 3515 [RFC3515], NOTIFY   requests sent as a result of an implicit subscription created by a   REFER request contain a body of type "message/sipfrag",RFC 3420   [RFC3420], that describes the status of the transaction initiated by   the REFER-Recipient.   In the case of a REFER-Issuer that generates a REFER with multiple   REFER-targets, the REFER-Issuer is typically already subscribed to   other event packages that can provide the information about the   result of the transactions towards the REFER-Targets.  For example, a   moderator instructing a conference server to send a BYE request to a   set of participants is usually subscribed to the conference state   event package for the conference.  Notifications to this event   package will keep the moderator and the rest of the subscribers   informed of the current list of conference participants.   Most of the applications using the multiple REFER technology   described in this memo do not need its implicit subscription.   Consequently, a SIP REFER-Issuer generating a REFER request with   multiple REFER-Targets SHOULD include the "norefersub" option-tag in   a Require header field and SHOULD include a Refer-Sub header field   set to "false" to indicate that no notifications about the requests   should be sent to the REFER-Issuer.  The REFER-Recipient SHOULD honor   the suggestion and also include a Refer-Sub header field set to   "false" in the 200 (OK) response.  The "norefersub" SIP option-tag   and the Refer-Sub header field are specified inRFC 4488 [RFC4488].RFC 4488 [RFC4488] indicates that a condition for the REFER-Issuer      to include a Refer-Sub header is that the REFER-Issuer is sure      that the REFER request will not fork.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   At the time of writing, there is no extension that allows to report   the status of several transactions over the implicit subscription   associated with a REFER dialog.  That is the motivation for this   document to recommend the usage of the "norefersub" option-tag.  If   in the future such an extension is defined, REFER-Issuers using it   could refrain from using the "norefersub" option-tag and use the new   extension instead.6.  URI-List Format   As described inRFC 5363 [RFC5363], specifications of individual URI-   list services need to specify a default format for 'recipient-list'   bodies used within the particular service.   The default format for 'recipient-list' bodies for REFER-Issuers and   REFER-Recipients isRFC 4826 [RFC4826] extended withRFC 5364   [RFC5364].  REFER-Recipients handling 'recipient-list' bodies MUST   support both of these formats.  Both REFER-Issuers and REFER-   Recipients MAY support other formats.   As described inRFC 5364 [RFC5364], each URI can be tagged with a   'copyControl' attribute set to either "to", "cc", or "bcc",   indicating the role in which the target will get the referred SIP   request.  However, depending on the target SIP method, a   'copyControl' attribute lacks sense.  For example, while a   'copyControl' attribute can be applied to INVITE requests, it does   not make sense with mid-dialog requests such as BYE requests.   In addition to the 'copyControl' attribute, URIs can be tagged with   the 'anonymize' attribute (also specified inRFC 5364 [RFC5364]) to   prevent that the REFER-Recipient discloses the target URI in a URI   list.   Additionally,RFC 5364 [RFC5364] defines a 'recipient-list-history'   body that contains the list of targets.  The default format for   'recipient-list-history' bodies for conference services is alsoRFC4826 [RFC4826] extended withRFC 5364 [RFC5364].  REFER-Recipients   supporting this specification MUST support both of these formats;   REFER-Targets MAY support these formats.  Both REFER-Recipients and   REFER-Targets MAY support other formats.   Nevertheless,RFC 4826 [RFC4826] provides features, such as   hierarchical lists and the ability to include entries by reference   relative to the XML Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) root URI,   that are not needed by the multiple REFER service defined in this   document.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   Figure 1 shows an example of a flat list that follows the resource   list document.   <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>   <resource-lists xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists"              xmlns:cp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:copycontrol">     <list>       <entry uri="sip:bill@example.com" cp:copyControl="to"  />       <entry uri="sip:joe@example.org" cp:copyControl="cc" />       <entry uri="sip:ted@example.net" cp:copyControl="bcc" />     </list>   </resource-lists>                            Figure 1: URI list7.  Behavior of SIP REFER-Issuers   As indicated in Sections4 and5, a SIP REFER-Issuer that creates a   REFER request with multiple REFER-Targets includes a "multiple-refer"   and "norefersub" option-tags in the Require header field and, if   appropriate, a Refer-Sub header field set to "false".  The REFER-   Issuer includes the set of REFER-Targets in a recipient-list body   whose disposition type is 'recipient-list', as defined inRFC 5363   [RFC5363].  The URI-list body is further described inSection 6.   The Refer-To header field of a REFER request with multiple REFER-   Targets MUST contain a pointer (i.e., a Content-ID Uniform Resource   Locator (URL) as perRFC 2392 [RFC2392]) that points to the body part   that carries the URI list.  The REFER-Issuer SHOULD NOT include any   particular URI more than once in the URI list.RFC 4826 [RFC4826] provides features, such as hierarchical lists and   the ability to include entries by reference relative to the XCAP root   URI.  However, these features are not needed by the multiple REFER   service defined in this document.  Therefore, when using the default   resource list document, SIP REFER-Issuers generating REFER requests   with multiple REFER-Targets SHOULD use flat lists (i.e., no   hierarchical lists) and SHOULD NOT use <entry-ref> elements.8.  Behavior of REFER-Recipients   The REFER-Recipient follows the rules inSection 2.4.2 of RFC 3515   [RFC3515] to determine the status code of the response to the REFER.   The REFER-Recipient SHOULD not create an implicit subscription, and   SHOULD add a Refer-Sub header field set to "false" in the 200 OK   response.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   The incoming REFER request typically contains a URI-list document or   reference with the actual list of targets.  If this URI list includes   resources tagged with the 'copyControl' attribute set to a value of   "to" or "cc", and if the request is appropriate for the service,   e.g., it is not received mid-dialog, the REFER-Recipient SHOULD   include a URI list in each of the outgoing requests.  This list   SHOULD be formatted according toRFC 4826 [RFC4826] andRFC 5364   [RFC5364].  The REFER-Recipient MUST follow the procedures specified   inRFC 4826 [RFC4826] with respect to handling of the 'anonymize',   'count', and 'copyControl' attributes.Section 4 of RFC 5363 [RFC5363] discusses cases when duplicated URIs   are found in a URI list.  In order to avoid duplicated requests,   REFER-Recipients MUST take those actions specified inRFC 5363   [RFC5363] into account to avoid sending a duplicated request to the   same target.   If the REFER-Recipient includes a URI list in an outgoing request, it   MUST include a Content-Disposition header field, specified inRFC2183 [RFC2183], with the value set to 'recipient-list-history' and a   'handling' parameter, specified inRFC 3204 [RFC3204], set to   "optional".   Since the multiple REFER service does not use hierarchical lists nor   lists that include entries by reference to the XCAP root URI, a   REFER-Recipient receiving a URI list with more information than what   has been described inSection 6 MAY discard all the extra   information.   The REFER-Recipient follows the rules inRFC 3515 [RFC3515] to   generate the necessary requests towards the REFER-Targets, acting as   if it had received a regular (no URI list) REFER per each URI in the   URI list.9.  Example   Figure 2 shows an example flow where a REFER-Issuer sends a multiple-   REFER request to the focus of a conference, which acts as the REFER-   Recipient.  The REFER-Recipient generates a BYE request per REFER-   Target.  Details for using REFER request to remove participants from   a conference are specified inRFC 4579 [RFC4579].Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   +--------+         +---------+    +--------+  +--------+  +--------+   | REFER  |         |  REFER  |    | REFER  |  | REFER  |  | REFER  |   | issuer |         |recipient|    |target 1|  |target 2|  |target 3|   |        |         |         |    |        |  |        |  |        |   | Carol  |         | (focus) |    |  Bill  |  |  Joe   |  |  Ted   |   +--------+         +---------+    +--------+  +--------+  +--------+        | 1. REFER         |             |           |           |        | ---------------->|             |           |           |        | 2. 202 Accepted  |             |           |           |        |<---------------- |   3. BYE    |           |           |        |                  | ----------->|           |           |        |                  |   4. BYE    |           |           |        |                  | ----------------------->|           |        |                  |   5. BYE    |           |           |        |                  | ----------------------------------->|        |                  |   6. 200 OK |           |           |        |                  |<----------- |           |           |        |                  |   7. 200 OK |           |           |        |                  |<----------------------- |           |        |                  |   8. 200 OK |           |           |        |                  |<----------------------------------- |        |                  |             |           |           |        |                  |             |           |           |        |                  |             |           |           |           Figure 2: Example flow of a REFER request containing                          multiple REFER-Targets   The REFER request (1) contains a Refer-To header field that includes   a pointer to the message body, which carries a list with the URIs of   the REFER-Targets.  In this example, the URI list does not contain   the 'copyControl' attribute extension.  The REFER's Require header   field carries the "multiple-refer" and "norefersub" option-tags.  The   Request-URI is set to a Globally Routable User Agent URI (GRUU)   [SIP-GRUU] (as a guarantee that the REFER request will not fork).   The Refer-Sub header field is set to "false" to request the   suppression of the implicit subscription.  Figure 3 shows an example   of this REFER request.  The resource list document contains the list   of REFER-Target URIs along with the method of the SIP request that   the REFER-Recipient generates.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   REFER sip:conf-123@example.com;gruu;opaque=hha9s8d-999a  SIP/2.0   Via: SIP/2.0/TCP client.chicago.example.com           ;branch=z9hG4bKhjhs8ass83   Max-Forwards: 70   To: "Conference 123" <sip:conf-123@example.com>   From: Carol <sip:carol@chicago.example.com>;tag=32331   Call-ID: d432fa84b4c76e66710   CSeq: 2 REFER   Contact: <sip:carol@client.chicago.example.com>   Refer-To: <cid:cn35t8jf02@example.com>   Refer-Sub: false   Require: multiple-refer, norefersub   Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY   Allow-Events: dialog   Accept: application/sdp, message/sipfrag   Content-Type: application/resource-lists+xml   Content-Disposition: recipient-list   Content-Length: 362   Content-ID: <cn35t8jf02@example.com>   <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>   <resource-lists xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists"           xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">     <list>       <entry uri="sip:bill@example.com?method=BYE" />       <entry uri="sip:joe@example.org?method=BYE" />       <entry uri="sip:ted@example.net?method=BYE" />     </list>   </resource-lists>            Figure 3: REFER request with multiple REFER-Targets   Figure 4 shows an example of the BYE request (3) that the REFER-   Recipient sends to the first REFER-Target.   BYE sip:bill@example.com SIP/2.0   Via: SIP/2.0/TCP conference.example.com           ;branch=z9hG4bKhjhs8assmm   Max-Forwards: 70   From: "Conference 123" <sip:conf-123@example.com>;tag=88734   To: <sip:bill@example.com>;tag=29872   Call-ID: d432fa84b4c34098s812   CSeq: 34 BYE   Content-Length: 0                           Figure 4: BYE requestCamarillo, et al.           Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 200810.  Security ConsiderationsRFC 5363 [RFC5363] discusses issues related to SIP URI-list services.   Given that a REFER-Recipient accepting REFER requests with multiple   REFER-targets acts as a URI-list service, implementations of this   type of server MUST follow the security-related rules inRFC 5363   [RFC5363].  These rules include opt-in lists and mandatory   authentication and authorization of clients.   Additionally, REFER-Recipients SHOULD only accept REFER requests   within the context of an application that the REFER-Recipient   understands (e.g., a conferencing application).  This implies that   REFER-Recipients MUST NOT accept REFER requests for methods they do   not understand.  The idea behind these two rules is that REFER-   Recipients are not used as dumb servers whose only function is to   fan-out random messages they do not understand.11.  IANA Considerations   This document defines a new SIP option-tag: "multiple-refer".  This   option-tag has been registered in the SIP Parameters registry.   The following row has been added to the "Option Tags" section of the   SIP Parameter Registry:   +-----------------+-------------------------------------+-----------+   | Name            | Description                         | Reference |   +-----------------+-------------------------------------+-----------+   | multiple-refer  | This option tag indicates support   | [RFC5368] |   |                 | for REFER requests that contain a   |           |   |                 | resource list document describing   |           |   |                 | multiple REFER targets.             |           |   +-----------------+-------------------------------------+-----------+      Table 1: Registration of the 'multiple-refer' option-tag in SIP12.  References12.1.  Normative References   [RFC2119]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate               Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC2183]   Troost, R., Dorner, S., and K. Moore, "Communicating               Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The               Content-Disposition Header Field",RFC 2183, August 1997.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008   [RFC2392]   Levinson, E., "Content-ID and Message-ID Uniform Resource               Locators",RFC 2392, August 1998.   [RFC3204]   Zimmerer, E., Peterson, J., Vemuri, A., Ong, L., Audet,               F., Watson, M., and M. Zonoun, "MIME media types for ISUP               and QSIG Objects",RFC 3204, December 2001.   [RFC3261]   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.   [RFC3420]   Sparks, R., "Internet Media Type message/sipfrag",RFC 3420, November 2002.   [RFC3515]   Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer               Method",RFC 3515, April 2003.   [RFC4488]   Levin, O., "Suppression of Session Initiation Protocol               (SIP) REFER Method Implicit Subscription",RFC 4488,               May 2006.   [RFC4826]   Rosenberg, J., "Extensible Markup Language (XML) Formats               for Representing Resource Lists",RFC 4826, May 2007.   [RFC5363]   Camarillo, G. and A.B. Roach, "Framework and Security               Considerations for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) URI-               List Services",RFC 5363, October 2008.   [RFC5364]   Garcia-Martin, M. and G. Camarillo, "Extensible Markup               Language (XML) Format Extension for Representing Copy               Control Attributes in Resource Lists",RFC 5364,               October 2008.12.2.  Informative References   [RFC4575]   Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and O. Levin, "A Session               Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Conference               State",RFC 4575, August 2006.   [RFC4579]   Johnston, A. and O. Levin, "Session Initiation Protocol               (SIP) Call Control - Conferencing for User Agents",BCP 119,RFC 4579, August 2006.   [SIP-GRUU]  Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable               User Agent (UA) URIs (GRUU) in the Session Initiation               Protocol (SIP)", Work in Progress, October 2007.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 11]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008Authors' Addresses   Gonzalo Camarillo   Ericsson   Hirsalantie 11   Jorvas  02420   Finland   EMail: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com   Aki Niemi   Nokia   P.O. Box 321   NOKIA GROUP, FIN 00045   Finland   EMail: Aki.Niemi@nokia.com   Markus Isomaki   Nokia   P.O. Box 100   NOKIA GROUP, FIN  00045   Finland   EMail: markus.isomaki@nokia.com   Miguel A. Garcia-Martin   Ericsson   Via de los Poblados 13   Madrid  28033   Spain   EMail: miguel.a.garcia@ericsson.com   Hisham Khartabil   Ericsson Australia   EMail: hisham.khartabil@gmail.comCamarillo, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 12]

RFC 5368                   SIP Multiple REFER               October 2008Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).   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, THE IETF TRUST 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.Camarillo, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 13]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp