Network Working Group P. Saint-Andre
Internet-Draft &yet
Intended status: Standards Track S. Loreto
Expires: February 5, 2015 Ericsson
August 4, 2014
Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the
Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): One-to-One Text Chat
Sessions
draft-ietf-stox-chat-08
Abstract
This document defines a bidirectional protocol mapping for the
exchange of instant messages in the context of a one-to-one chat
session between a user of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and a
user of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
Specifically for SIP text chat, this document specifies a mapping to
the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP).
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 http://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 February 5, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 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
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
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 Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Intended Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. XMPP to MSRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. MSRP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Composing Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Delivery Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction
Both the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] and the
Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) [RFC6120] can be
used for the purpose of one-to-one text chat over the Internet. To
ensure interworking between these technologies, it is important to
define bidirectional protocol mappings.
The architectural assumptions underlying such protocol mappings are
provided in [RFC7247], including mapping of addresses and error
conditions. This document specifies mappings for one-to-one text
chat sessions (sometimes called "session-mode" messaging); in
particular, this document specifies mappings between XMPP messages of
type "chat" and the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) [RFC4975],
which is commonly used in SIP-based systems for chat functionality
(although note that MSRP is not conjoined to SIP, and can be used by
non-SIP technologies). Mappings for single instant messages and
groupchat are provided in separate documents.
The approach taken here is to directly map syntax and semantics from
one protocol to another. The mapping described herein depends on the
protocols defined in the following specifications:
o XMPP chat sessions using message stanzas of type "chat" are
specified in [RFC6121].
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
o MSRP chat sessions using the SIP INVITE and SEND request types are
specified in [RFC4975].
In SIP-based systems that use MSRP, a chat session is formally
negotiated just as any other session type is using SIP. By contrast,
a one-to-one chat "session" in XMPP is an informal construct and is
not formally negotiated: a user simply sends a message of type "chat"
to a contact, the contact then replies to the message, and the sum
total of such messages exchanged during a defined period of time is
considered to be a chat session (ideally tied together using an XMPP
element as described in Section 5.1 of [RFC6121]). To
overcome the disparity between these approaches, a gateway that
wishes to map between SIP/MSRP and XMPP for one-to-one chat sessions
needs to maintain some additional state, as described below.
2. Intended Audience
The documents in this series are intended for use by software
developers who have an existing system based on one of these
technologies (e.g., SIP), and would like to enable communication from
that existing system to systems based on the other technology (e.g.,
XMPP). We assume that readers are familiar with the core
specifications for both SIP [RFC3261] and XMPP [RFC6120], with the
base document for this series [RFC7247], and with the following chat-
related specifications:
o The Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) [RFC4975]
o Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol: Instant Messaging and
Presence [RFC6121]
o Indication of Message Composition for Instant Messaging [RFC3994]
o Chat State Notifications [XEP-0085]
Note well that not all protocol-compliant messages are shown (such as
SIP 100 TRYING messages), in order to focus the reader on the
essential aspects of the protocol flows.
3. Terminology
A number of terms used here are explained in [RFC3261], [RFC4975],
[RFC6120], and [RFC6121].
In flow diagrams, SIP/MSRP traffic is shown using arrows such as
"***>" whereas XMPP traffic is shown using arrows such as "...>".
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
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
[RFC2119].
4. XMPP to MSRP
In XMPP, the "informal session" approach is to simply send someone a
of type "chat" without starting any session negotiation
ahead of time (as described in [RFC6121]). The XMPP "informal
session" approach maps very well into a SIP MESSAGE request, as
described in [RFC7247]. However, the XMPP informal session approach
can also be mapped to MSRP if the XMPP-to-SIP gateway maintains
additional state. The order of events is as follows.
XMPP XMPP XMPP-to-MSRP SIP SIP
User Server Gateway Server User
| | | | |
| (F1) XMPP | | | |
| message | | | |
|..............>| | | |
| | (F2) XMPP | | |
| | message | | |
| |..............>| | |
| | | (F3) SIP | |
| | | INVITE | |
| | |**************>| |
| | | | (F4) SIP |
| | | | INVITE |
| | | |**************>|
| | | | (F5) SIP |
| | | | 200 OK |
| | | |<**************|
| | | (F6) SIP | |
| | | 200 OK | |
| | |<**************| |
| | | (F7) SIP ACK | |
| | |**************>| |
| | | | (F8) SIP ACK |
| | | |**************>|
| | | (F9) MSRP SEND |
| | |******************************>|
. . . . .
. . . . .
| | | (F10) MSRP SEND |
| | |<******************************|
| | (F11) XMPP | | |
| | message | | |
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
| |<..............| | |
| (F12) XMPP | | | |
| message | | | |
|<..............| | | |
. . . . .
. . . . .
| | | | (F13) SIP BYE |
| | | |<**************|
| | | (F14) SIP BYE | |
| | |<**************| |
| | | (F15) SIP | |
| | | 200 OK | |
| | |**************>| |
| | | | (F16) SIP |
| | | | 200 OK |
| | | |**************>|
Figure 1: XMPP to MSRP Order of Events
The mapping of XMPP syntax to SIP syntax SHOULD be as shown in the
following table. (Mappings for several aspects not mentioned here
are specified in [I-D.ietf-stox-im].)
Table 1: Message syntax mapping from XMPP to SIP
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
| XMPP Element or Attribute | SIP Header or Contents |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
| | Call-ID |
| id | transaction identifier |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
First the XMPP user would generate an XMPP chat message.
Example 1: Juliet sends XMPP message (F1)
|
| 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?
|
Upon receiving such a message stanza, the XMPP server needs to
determine the identity of the domainpart in the 'to' address, which
it does by following the procedures explained in Section 5 of
[RFC7247]. If the domain is a SIP domain, the XMPP server will hand
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
off the message stanza to an XMPP-to-SIP gateway or connection
manager that natively communicates with MSRP-aware SIP servers.
The XMPP-to-SIP gateway at the XMPP server would then initiate an
MSRP session with Romeo on Juliet's behalf (since there is no
reliable way for the gateway to determine if Romeo's client supports
MSRP, it simply needs to guess).
Example 2: Gateway starts SIP session on behalf of Juliet (F3)
| INVITE sip:romeo@example.net SIP/2.0
| To:
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=balcony
| Subject: Open chat with Juliet?
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Content-Type: application/sdp
|
| c=IN IP4 x2s.example.com
| m=message 7654 TCP/MSRP *
| a=accept-types:text/plain
| a=path:msrp://x2s.example.com:7654/jshA7weztas;tcp
Here we assume that Romeo accepts the MSRP session request.
Example 3: Romeo accepts session request (F5)
| SIP/2.0 200 OK
| To:
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Content-Type: application/sdp
|
| c=IN IP4 s2x.example.net
| m=message 12763 TCP/MSRP *
| a=accept-types:text/plain
| a=path:msrp://s2x.example.net:12763/kjhd37s2s20w2a;tcp
The XMPP-to-SIP gateway then acknowledges the session acceptance on
behalf of Juliet.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 4: Gateway sends ACK to Romeo (F7)
| ACK sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| To: ;gr=orchard
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=balcony
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
The XMPP-to-SIP gateway then transforms the original XMPP chat
message into MSRP.
Example 5: Gateway maps XMPP message to MSRP (F9)
| MSRP a786hjs2 SEND
| From-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:7654/jshA7weztas;tcp
| To-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:12763/kjhd37s2s20w2a;tcp
| Message-ID: 54C6F4F1-A39C-47D6-8718-FA65B3D0414A
| Byte-Range: 1-25/25
| Content-Type: text/plain
|
| Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?
| -------a786hjs2$
Romeo can then send a reply using his MSRP client.
Example 6: Romeo sends reply (F10)
| MSRP di2fs53v SEND
| To-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:7654/jshA7weztas;tcp
| From-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:12763/kjhd37s2s20w2a;tcp
| Message-ID: 6480C096-937A-46E7-BF9D-1353706B60AA
| Byte-Range: 1-25/25
| Failure-Report: no
| Content-Type: text/plain
|
| Neither, fair saint, if either thee dislike.
| -------di2fs53v$
The SIP-to-XMPP gateway would then transform that message into
appropriate XMPP syntax for routing to the intended recipient.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 7: Gateway maps MSRP message to XMPP (F11)
|
| 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Neither, fair saint, if either thee dislike.
|
When the MSRP user wishes to end the chat session, the user's MSRP
client sends a SIP BYE.
Example 8: Romeo terminates chat session (F13)
| BYE juliet@example.com sip: SIP/2.0
| From: ;tag=087js
| To: ;tag=786
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Cseq: 1 BYE
| Content-Length: 0
The BYE is then acknowledged by the XMPP-to-SIP gateway.
Example 9: Gateway acknowledges termination (F15)
| SIP/2.0 200 OK
| From: ;tag=786
| To: ;tag=087js
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| CSeq: 1 BYE
| Content-Length: 0
Because there is no formal session on the XMPP side, there is no
corresponding communication from the gateway to the XMPP user.
However, it is reasonable for the gateway to send a "gone" chat state
notification [XEP-0085], as described under Section 6.1.
5. MSRP to XMPP
When an MSRP client sends messages through a gateway to an XMPP
client, the order of events is as follows.
SIP SIP MSRP-to-XMPP XMPP XMPP
User Server Gateway Server User
| | | | |
| (F17) SIP | | | |
| INVITE | | | |
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
|**************>| | | |
| | (F18) SIP | | |
| | INVITE | | |
| |**************>| | |
| | (F19) SIP | | |
| | 200 OK | | |
| |<**************| | |
| (F20) SIP | | | |
| 200 OK | | | |
|<**************| | | |
| (F21) SIP ACK | | | |
|**************>| | | |
| | (F22) SIP ACK | | |
| |**************>| | |
| (F23) MSRP SEND | | |
|******************************>| | |
| | | (F24) XMPP | |
| | | message | |
| | |..............>| |
| | | | (F25) XMPP |
| | | | message |
| | | |..............>|
. . . . .
. . . . .
| | | | (F26) XMPP |
| | | | message |
| | | |<..............|
| | | (F27) XMPP | |
| | | message | |
| | |<..............| |
| (F28) MSRP SEND | | |
|<******************************| | |
. . . . .
. . . . .
| | | | |
| | | | |
| (F29) SIP BYE | | | |
|**************>| | | |
| | (F30) SIP BYE | | |
| |**************>| | |
| | (F31) SIP | | |
| | 200 OK | | |
| |<**************| | |
| (F36) SIP | | | |
| 200 OK | | | |
|<**************| | | |
Figure 2: MSRP to XMPP Order of Events
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
The mapping of SIP syntax to XMPP syntax SHOULD be as shown in the
following table. (Mappings for several aspects not mentioned here
are specified in [I-D.ietf-stox-im].)
Table 2: Message syntax mapping from SIP to XMPP
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| SIP Header or Contents | XMPP Element or Attribute |
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Call-ID | |
| transaction identifier | id |
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
The protocol flow begins when Romeo starts a chat session with
Juliet.
Example 10: Romeo starts chat session (F17)
| INVITE sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| To:
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Subject: Open chat with Romeo?
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| Content-Type: application/sdp
|
| c=IN IP4 s2x.example.net
| m=message 7313 TCP/MSRP *
| a=accept-types:text/plain
| a=path:msrp://s2x.example.net:7313/ansp71weztas;tcp
Upon receiving the INVITE, the SIP (MSRP) server needs to determine
the identity of the domain portion of the Request-URI or To header,
which it does by following the procedures explained in Section 5 of
[RFC7247]. If the domain is an XMPP domain, the SIP server will hand
off the INVITE to an associated MSRP-to-XMPP gateway or connection
manager that natively communicates with XMPP servers.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 11: Gateway accepts session on Juliet's behalf (F19)
| SIP/2.0 200 OK
| To: ;gr=orchard
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=balcony
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| Content-Type: application/sdp
|
| c=IN IP4 x2s.example.com
| m=message 8763 TCP/MSRP *
| a=accept-types:text/plain
| a=path:msrp://x2s.example.com:8763/lkjh37s2s20w2a;tcp
Example 12: Romeo sends ACK (F21)
| ACK sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| To: ;gr=balcony
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
Example 13: Romeo sends message (F23)
| MSRP ad49kswow SEND
| To-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:8763/lkjh37s2s20w2a;tcp
| From-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:7313/ansp71weztas;tcp
| Message-ID: 676FDB92-7852-443A-8005-2A1B9FE44F4E
| Byte-Range: 1-32/32
| Failure-Report: no
| Content-Type: text/plain
|
| I take thee at thy word ...
| -------ad49kswow$
Example 14: MSRP-to-XMPP gateway maps MSRP message to XMPP (F24)
|
| F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| I take thee at thy word ...
|
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 15: Juliet sends reply (F26)
|
| 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| What man art thou ...?
|
Example 16: Gateway maps XMPP message to MSRP (F28)
| MSRP ms53b7z9 SEND
| To-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:7313/jshA7weztas;tcp
| From-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:8763/lkjh37s2s20w2a;tcp
| Message-ID: 17EBA17B-94C0-463B-AD84-DE405C4C9D41
| Byte-Range: 1-25/25
| Failure-Report: no
| Content-Type: text/plain
|
| What man art thou ...?
| -------ms53b7z9$
Example 17: Romeo terminates chat session (F29)
| BYE juliet@example.com sip: SIP/2.0
| To: ;gr=balcony
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| Cseq: 1 BYE
| Content-Length: 0
Example 18: Gateway acknowledges termination of session on behalf of
Juliet (F31)
| SIP/2.0 200 OK
| To: ;gr=balcony
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| CSeq: 1 BYE
6. Composing Events
Both XMPP and MSRP enable a client to receive notifications when a
person's conversation partner is composing an instant message within
the context of a chat session.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
For XMPP, the Chat State Notifications specification [XEP-0085]
defines five states: active, inactive, gone, composing, and paused.
Some of these states are related to the act of message composition
(composing, paused), whereas others are related to the sender's
involvement with the chat session (active, inactive, gone). Note
that the "gone" chat state is not to be confused with the
stanza error condition defined in [RFC6120].
For MSRP (and SIP/SIMPLE in general), the Indication of Message
Composition for Instant Messaging specification [RFC3994] defines two
states: idle and active. Here the idle state indicates that the
sender is not actively composing a message, and the active state
indicates that the sender is indeed actively composing a message (the
sending client simply toggles between the two states, changing to
active if the user is actively composing a message and changing to
idle if the user is no longer actively composing a message).
Because the XEP-0085 states can represent information that is not
captured in RFC 3994, gateways can either (a) map only the composing-
related states or (b) map all the XEP-0085 states.
The following mappings are suggested.
Table 3: Mapping of SIP/SIMPLE isComposing events to XMPP chat states
+-------------------+--------------------+
| isComposing Event | Chat State |
+-------------------+--------------------+
| active | composing |
| idle | active |
+-------------------+--------------------+
Table 4: Mapping of XMPP chat states to SIP/SIMPLE isComposing events
+-------------------+--------------------+
| Chat State | isComposing Event |
+-------------------+--------------------+
| active | idle |
| inactive | idle |
| gone | [none, see note] |
| composing | active |
| paused | idle |
+-------------------+--------------------+
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
6.1. Use of the Gone Chat State
Although there is no direct mapping for the "gone" chat state to an
isComposing event, receipt of the "gone" state at an XMPP-to-MSRP
gateway can serve as a trigger for terminating the formal chat
session within MSRP, i.e., for sending a SIP BYE for the session from
the XMPP-to-MSRP gateway to the SIP user. The following examples
illustrate this indirect mapping (which would occur after step F14 in
Figure 1).
Example 19: Juliet sends gone chat state
|
| 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
|
|
Example 20: XMPP-to-MSRP gateway maps gone chat state to SIP BYE
| BYE romeo@example.net sip: SIP/2.0
| From: ;tag=786
| To: ;tag=087js
| Call-ID: 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| Cseq: 1 BYE
| Content-Length: 0
Similarly, receipt of a SIP BYE message at an MSRP-to-XMPP gateway
can server as a trigger for sending a "gone" chat state notification
to the XMPP user. The following examples illustrate this indirect
mapping (which would occur after step F30 in Figure 2).
Example 21: Romeo terminates chat session
| BYE juliet@example.com sip: SIP/2.0
| To: ;gr=balcony
| From:
| Contact: ;gr=orchard
| Call-ID: F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
| Cseq: 1 BYE
| Content-Length: 0
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 22: MSRP-to-XMPP gateway generates gone chat state
|
| F6989A8C-DE8A-4E21-8E07-F0898304796F
|
|
To enable these uses, gateways that support chat state notifications
MUST support the "gone" state (which is merely recommended, not
required, by [XEP-0085]).
It is also reasonable for gateways to implement timers that
automatically trigger a "gone" chat state if the XMPP user has not
sent a message within the "session" for a given amount of time.
7. Delivery Reports
Both XMPP and MSRP enable a client to receive notifications when a
message has been received by the intended recipient.
For XMPP, the Message Receipts specification [XEP-0184] defines a
method and XML namespace for requesting and returning indications
that a message has been received by a client controlled by the
intended recipient.
For MSRP, a native reporting feature is included, in the form of
REPORT chunks (see Sections 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 of [RFC4975]).
Examples follow.
First, the XMPP user sends a message containing a request for
delivery notification.
Example 23: Juliet sends XMPP message with receipt request
|
| 29377446-0CBB-4296-8958-590D79094C50
| What man art thou ...?
|
|
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Example 24: Gateway maps XMPP message to MSRP
| MSRP bf9m36d5 SEND
| To-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:7313/jshA7weztas;tcp
| From-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:8763/lkjh37s2s20w2a;tcp
| Message-ID: 6187CF9B-317A-41DA-BB6A-5E48A9C794EF
| Byte-Range: 1-25/25
| Success-Report: yes
| Failure-Report: no
| Content-Type: text/plain
|
| What man art thou ...?
| -------bf9m36d5$
Next, the recipient returns a report.
Example 25: Romeo returns MSRP receipt
| MSRP hx74g336 REPORT
| To-Path: msrp://x2s.example.com:8763/lkjh37s2s20w2a;tcp
| From-Path: msrp://s2x.example.net:7313/jshA7weztas;tcp
| Message-ID: 6187CF9B-317A-41DA-BB6A-5E48A9C794EF
| Byte-Range: 1-106/106
| Status: 000 200 OK
| -------hx74g336$
Example 26: MSRP-to-XMPP gateway maps receipt to XMPP
|
|
|
8. Internationalization Considerations
Relevant discussion of internationalized text in messages can be
found in [I-D.ietf-stox-im].
9. IANA Considerations
This document requests no actions of IANA.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
10. Security Considerations
Detailed security considerations for instant messaging protocols are
given in [RFC2779], for MSRP chat in [RFC4975] (see also [RFC3261]
when SIP is used to negotiate MSRP sessions), and for XMPP-based
instant messaging in [RFC6121] (see also [RFC6120]). The security
considerations provided in [RFC7247] also apply.
This document specifies methods for exchanging instant messages
through a gateway that translates between SIP/MSRP and XMPP. Such a
gateway MUST be compliant with the minimum security requirements of
the textual chat protocols for which it translates (i.e., MSRP and
XMPP). The addition of gateways to the security model of instant
messaging specified in [RFC2779] introduces some new risks. In
particular, end-to-end security properties (especially
confidentiality and integrity) between instant messaging clients that
interface through an MSRP-XMPP gateway can be provided only if common
formats are supported. Specification of those common formats is out
of scope for this document, although it is suggested to use [RFC3862]
for instant messages.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[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.
[RFC3862] Klyne, G. and D. Atkins, "Common Presence and Instant
Messaging (CPIM): Message Format", RFC 3862, August 2004.
[RFC3994] Schulzrinne, H., "Indication of Message Composition for
Instant Messaging", RFC 3994, January 2005.
[RFC4975] Campbell, B., Mahy, R., and C. Jennings, "The Message
Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4975, September 2007.
[RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011.
[RFC6121] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence", RFC
6121, March 2011.
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
[RFC7247] Saint-Andre, P., Houri, A., and J. Hildebrand,
"Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol
(XMPP): Architecture, Addresses, and Error Handling", RFC
7247, May 2014.
[XEP-0085]
Saint-Andre, P. and D. Smith, "Chat State Notifications",
XSF XEP 0085, September 2009.
[XEP-0184]
Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hildebrand, "Message Delivery
Receipts", XSF XEP 0184, March 2011.
11.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-stox-im]
Saint-Andre, P., Houri, A., and J. Hildebrand,
"Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol
(XMPP): Instant Messaging", draft-ietf-stox-im-10 (work in
progress), August 2014.
[RFC2779] Day, M., Aggarwal, S., and J. Vincent, "Instant Messaging
/ Presence Protocol Requirements", RFC 2779, February
2000.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Eddy Gavita and Nazin Hossain for co-authoring an
early version of this document.
Thanks to Mary Barnes, Ben Campbell, Dave Crocker, Adrian Georgescu,
Philipp Hancke, Saul Ibarra Corretge, Tory Patnoe, and Matt Ryan for
their feedback.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Markus Isomaki
and Yana Stamcheva as the working group chairs and Gonzalo Camarillo
and Alissa Cooper as the sponsoring Area Directors.
Peter Saint-Andre wishes to acknowledge Cisco Systems, Inc., for
employing him during his work on earlier versions of this document.
Authors' Addresses
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft SIP-XMPP Interworking: Chat August 2014
Peter Saint-Andre
&yet
P.O. Box 787
Parker, CO 80134
USA
Email: peter@andyet.net
Salvatore Loreto
Ericsson
Hirsalantie 11
Jorvas 02420
Finland
Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com
Saint-Andre & Loreto Expires February 5, 2015 [Page 19]