Committed to connecting the world

  •  
wtisd

ITU-T work programme

Home : ITU-T Home : ITU-T Work Programme : H.235.10     
  ITU-T A.5 justification information for referenced document IETF RFC 8261 (2017) in draft H.235.10
1. Clear description of the referenced document:
Name: IETF RFC 8261 (2017)
Title: Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Encapsulation of SCTP Packets
2. Status of approval:
Standards track RFC approved in 2017.
3. Justification for the specific reference:
This is used as part of WebRTC DataChannels and is supported by H.323-series Recommendations.
4. Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
No IPR statements submitted
5. Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
Standards track RFC.
6. The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
Widely used by WebRTC implementations. Updated by: 8899, 8996.
7. Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
A component of a series of WebRTC-related RFCs.
8. Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
[RFC1122] Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, DOI 10.17487/RFC1122, October 1989, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1122./
/
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119./
/
[RFC4347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer Security", RFC 4347, DOI 10.17487/RFC4347, April 2006, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4347./
/
[RFC4820] Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., and P. Lei, "Padding Chunk and Parameter for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 4820, DOI 10.17487/RFC4820, March 2007, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4820./
/
[RFC4821] Mathis, M. and J. Heffner, "Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery", RFC 4821, DOI 10.17487/RFC4821, March 2007, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4821./
/
[RFC4960] Stewart, R., Ed., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 4960, DOI 10.17487/RFC4960, September 2007, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4960./
/
[RFC6347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347, January 2012, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6347./
/
[RFC6520] Seggelmann, R., Tuexen, M., and M. Williams, "Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Heartbeat Extension", RFC 6520, DOI 10.17487/RFC6520, February 2012, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6520./
/
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174./
/
[DATA-CHAN] Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC Data Channels", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-rtcweb-data- channel-13, January 2015. [Now RFC 8831.]/
/
[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791./
/
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black, "Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474, DOI 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2474./
/
[RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3168./
/
[RFC3758] Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P. Conrad, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Partial Reliability Extension", RFC 3758, DOI 10.17487/RFC3758, May 2004, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3758./
/
[RFC4895] Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Lei, P., and E. Rescorla, "Authenticated Chunks for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)", RFC 4895, DOI 10.17487/RFC4895, August 2007, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4895./
/
[RFC5061] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., Maruyama, S., and M. Kozuka, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Dynamic Address Reconfiguration", RFC 5061, DOI 10.17487/RFC5061, September 2007, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5061./
/
[RFC5245] Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT) Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, DOI 10.17487/RFC5245, April 2010, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5245./
/
[RFC6525] Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and P. Lei, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Stream Reconfiguration", RFC 6525, DOI 10.17487/RFC6525, February 2012, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6525./
/
[RFC6951] Tuexen, M. and R. Stewart, "UDP Encapsulation of Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Packets for End-Host to End-Host Communication", RFC 6951, DOI 10.17487/RFC6951, May 2013, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6951./
/
[RFC7496] Tuexen, M., Seggelmann, R., Stewart, R., and S. Loreto, "Additional Policies for the Partially Reliable Stream Control Transmission Protocol Extension", RFC 7496, DOI 10.17487/RFC7496, April 2015, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7496./
/
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200./
/
[RFC8260] Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., Loreto, S., and R. Seggelmann, "Stream Schedulers and User Message Interleaving for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 8260, November 2017./
/
[RTC-OVERVIEW] Alvestrand, H., "Overview: Real Time Protocols for Browser-based Applications", Work in Progress, draft-ietf- rtcweb-overview-18, March 2017. [Now RFC 8825.]/
9. Qualification of ISOC/IETF:
9.1-9.6     Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7     The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8     Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
10. Other (for any supplementary information):
N/A
Note: This form is based on Recommendation ITU-T A.5