Internet-Draft Fix SIPREC Metadata Media Type December 2024
Mongrain Expires 5 June 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
sipcore
Internet-Draft:
draft-mongrain-sipcore-siprec-fix-mediatype-00
Updates:
7866 (if approved)
Published:
Intended Status:
Informational
Expires:
Author:
D. Mongrain
Motorola Solutions

Updates to SIPREC correcting Metadata Media Type

Abstract

SIP-based Media Recording (SIPREC) protocol is defined by both RFC 7865 and RFC 7866. Unfortunately both RFCs contradict each other regarding how recording metadata is to be labeled. In addition, neither RFCs registered the new media type. This document updates RFC 7866 to align with RFC 7865 when labeling recording metadata and registers the new media type.

About This Document

This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mongrain-sipcore-siprec-fix-mediatype/.

Discussion of this document takes place on the WG Working Group mailing list (mailto:sipcore@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sipcore/. Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore/.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 June 2025.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

SIPREC is defined by [RFC7865] and [RFC7866]. The former specifies the use of 'application/rs-metadata+xml' when identifying metadata content whereas the latter uses "application/rs-metadata". And since neither documents registered the media type with IANA, this document does.

2. Conventions and Definitions

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

3. Updates to RFC 7866

Everywhere the following text occurs:

Replace with:

4. Security Considerations

The updates specified in this memo clarifies inconsistencies in published documents with regards to identifying recording metadata. It introduces no new security considerations beyond those listed in [RFC7866].

5. IANA Considerations

5.1. Media Type Registration

[RFC7865] defined a MIME media type for use with specifying recording metadata in XML data. This media type MUST be used when specifying recording metadata in SIPREC.

Type name: application

Subtype name: rs-metadata+xml

Required parameters: N/A

Optional parameters: N/A

Encoding considerations: Same as encoding considerations of application/xml as specified in [RFC7303].

Security considerations: See Section 4.

Interoperability considerations: Please note that [RFC7866] specified the use of "application/rs-metadata", which this document corrects.

Published specification: [RFC7865]

Applications which use this media type: SIPREC Clients (SRC) and Servers (SRS).

Fragment identifier considerations: N/A

Additional information:

  • Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A

  • Magic number(s): N/A

  • File extension(s): N/A

  • Macintosh file type code(s): N/A

Person & email address to contact for further information: IETF SIPCORE Working Group (sipcore@ietf.org)

Intended usage: COMMON

Restrictions on usage: There are no restrictions on where this media type can be used.

Author: IETF SIPCORE Working Group (sipcore@ietf.org)

Change controller: IETF

6. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC7303]
Thompson, H. and C. Lilley, "XML Media Types", RFC 7303, DOI 10.17487/RFC7303, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7303>.
[RFC7865]
Ravindranath, R., Ravindran, P., and P. Kyzivat, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Recording Metadata", RFC 7865, DOI 10.17487/RFC7865, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7865>.
[RFC7866]
Portman, L., Lum, H., Ed., Eckel, C., Johnston, A., and A. Hutton, "Session Recording Protocol", RFC 7866, DOI 10.17487/RFC7866, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7866>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments to Brian Rosen for his guidance with writing my first internet draft using the new tools and for his review.

Author's Address

Dan Mongrain
Motorola Solutions