|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 4583 (2006)
|
|
Title:
|
Session Description Protocol (SDP) Format for Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) Streams
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Standards track - Proposed Standard (November 2006).
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
H.248.91 defines requirements and profile guidelines for TLS bearer traffic, which includes SDP elements used for TLS based SDP media descriptions. This RFC (related to the BFCP) is relevant for the application-aware use case for the H.248 control of "BFCP-over-TLS" bearer traffic.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=4583
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
This RFC has been in existence since November 2006. This text is a Proposed Standard.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 4583 was published in November, 2006. Errata exist.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 4583 specifies how to describe Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) streams in Session Description Protocol (SDP) descriptions, which would be used by user agents in the offer/answer model to establish BFCP streams.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
[2] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005./
[3] 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./
[4] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 2002./
[5] Housley, R., Polk, W., Ford, W., and D. Solo, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 3280, April 2002./
[6] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.1 Certificate Handling", RFC 3850, July 2004./
[7] Yon, D. and G. Camarillo, "TCP-Based Media Transport in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4145, September 2005./
[8] Camarillo, G., Ott, J., and K. Drage, "The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)", RFC 4582, November 2006./
[9] Levin, O. and G. Camarillo, "The Session Description Protocol (SDP) Label Attribute", RFC 4574, July 2006./
[10] Lennox, J., "Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4572, July 2006./
[11] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 4566, July 2006.
|
|
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):
|
|
|
References should always be made to RFC numbers (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References not to be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
|
