Network Working Group                                          S. Loreto
Request for Comments: 5509                                      Ericsson
Category: Standards Track                                   April 2009


        Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registration
             of Instant Messaging and Presence DNS SRV RRs
               for 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.

 Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

 Abstract

   This document registers with IANA two new DNS SRV protocol labels for
   resolving Instant Messaging and Presence services with SIP.



















Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 1 


RFC 5509                 IANA SRV Label for SIP               April 2009


 Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  DNS SRV Usage of SIP with 'im' and 'pres' URIs  . . . . . . . . 3
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     5.1.  Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label Registration . . . . . 5
     5.2.  Presence SRV Protocol Label Registration  . . . . . . . . . 5
   6.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   7.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6







































Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 2 


RFC 5509                 IANA SRV Label for SIP               April 2009


1.  Introduction

   The Service Record (SRV) [RFC 2782] identifies the host(s) that will
   support particular services.  The DNS is queried for SRV RR in the
   general form:

   _Service._Proto.Name

      Service: the symbolic name of the desired service

      Proto: the protocol of the desired service

      Name: the domain name for which this record is valid

   "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC 3861]
   provides guidance for locating the services associated with URIs that
   employ the following two URI schemes [RFC 3986]: 'im' for INSTANT
   INBOXes [RFC 3860] and 'pres' for PRESENTITIES [RFC 3859].

   In order to ensure that the association between "_im" and "_pres" and
   their respective underlying services are deterministic, the IANA has
   created two independent registries: the Instant Messaging SRV
   Protocol Label registry and the Presence SRV Protocol Label registry.

   This document defines and registers the "_sip" protocol label in both
   registries so that computer programs can resolve 'im:' and 'pres:'
   URIs down to SIP addresses.

   Moreover, this document explains how the use of SIP for Presence and
   Instant Messaging uses SRV.


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 in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119].


3.  DNS SRV Usage of SIP with 'im' and 'pres' URIs

   Although there are standard procedures for resolving 'im' and 'pres'
   URIs (Section 3 of [RFC 3861]), the labels for SIP are not registered.

   Section 5 of [RFC 3428] states that if a user agent (UA) is presented
   with an IM URI (e.g., "im:fred@example.com") as the address for an
   instant message, it SHOULD resolve it to a SIP URI, and place the
   resulting URI in the Request-URI of the MESSAGE request before



Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 3 


RFC 5509                 IANA SRV Label for SIP               April 2009


   sending.

   Following the procedures defined in [RFC 3861], in order to resolve
   the IM URI, the UA performs a SRV lookup for:

   _im._sip.example.com

   Assuming that the example.com domain offers a SIP service for instant
   messaging at simple.example.com, this will result in a resolution of
   _im._sip.example.com. to simple.example.com.  Thus, the instant
   messaging URI im:fred@example.com would resolve to a SIP URI of
   sip:fred@simple.example.com.

   SIP supports both pager [RFC 3428] and session [RFC 4975] IM mode.
   However, a DNS SRV lookup does not specify which SIP IM mode a domain
   offer.  If the user agent client (UAC) supports both session mode and
   pager mode, it is then suggested to try session mode first; if that
   mode is rejected, the UAC has to be ready to fall back to pager mode.

   Section 5 of [RFC 3856] states that procedures defined in [RFC 3861]
   are also used to resolve the protocol-independent PRES URI for a
   presentity (e.g., "pres:fred@example.com") into a SIP URI.

   Following the procedures defined in [RFC 3861], in order to resolve
   the PRES URI, the UA performs a SRV lookup for:

   _pres._sip.example.com

   Assuming that the example.com domain offers a SIP presence service at
   simple.example.com, this will result in a resolution of
   _pres._sip.example.com. to simple.example.com.  Thus, the protocol-
   independent PRES URI pres:fred@example.com would resolve to a SIP URI
   of sip:fred@simple.example.com.


4.  Security Considerations

   This document merely serves for the registration of DNS SRV labels in
   the appropriate IANA registry.  The document does not specify a
   protocol; therefore, there are no security issues associated with it.


5.  IANA Considerations

   This specification registers a new SRV protocol label in both the
   Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry and the Presence SRV
   Protocol Label registry.




Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 4 


RFC 5509                 IANA SRV Label for SIP               April 2009


5.1.  Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label Registration

   "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC 3861]
   defines an Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry for
   protocols that can provide services that conform to the "_im" SRV
   Service label.  Because SIP is one such protocol, IANA registers the
   "_sip" protocol label in the "Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label
   Registry", as follows:

   Protocol label:  _sip

   Specification:  RFC 5509

   Description:  Instant messaging protocol label for the use of SIP for
                 Presence and Instant Messaging protocol as defined by
                 [RFC 3428].

   Registrant Contact:  Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>

5.2.  Presence SRV Protocol Label Registration

   "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence" [RFC 3861]
   defines a Presence SRV Protocol Label registry for protocols that can
   provide services that conform to the "_pres" SRV Service label.
   Because the use of SIP for Presence and Instant Messaging is one such
   protocol, the IANA registers the "_sip" protocol label in the
   "Presence SRV Protocol Label Registry", as follows:

   Protocol label:  _sip

   Specification:  RFC 5509

   Description:  Presence protocol label for the use of SIP for Presence
                 and Instant Messaging protocol as defined by [RFC 3856].

   Registrant Contact:  Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>


6.  Acknowledgments

   The need for this registration was discussed with Jon Peterson and
   Peter Saint-Andre.

   Miguel Garcia reviewed this document on behalf of the Real-time
   Applications and Infrastructure (RAI) Area Review Team (ART).






Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 5 


RFC 5509                 IANA SRV Label for SIP               April 2009


7.  Normative References

   [RFC 2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC 2782]  Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
              specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
              February 2000.

   [RFC 3428]  Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C.,
              and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
              for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002.

   [RFC 3856]  Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.

   [RFC 3859]  Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)",
              RFC 3859, August 2004.

   [RFC 3860]  Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging
              (CPIM)", RFC 3860, August 2004.

   [RFC 3861]  Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging
              and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004.

   [RFC 3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, January 2005.

   [RFC 4975]  Campbell, B., Mahy, R., and C. Jennings, "The Message
              Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4975, September 2007.


Author's Address

   Salvatore Loreto
   Ericsson
   Hirsalantie 11
   Jorvas  02420
   Finland

   Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com









Loreto                       Standards Track                 PAGE 6 




Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registration of Instant Messaging and Presence DNS SRV RRs for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

RFC TOTAL SIZE: 10053 bytes
PUBLICATION DATE: Tuesday, March 31st, 2009
LEGAL RIGHTS: The IETF Trust (see BCP 78)