Internet Engineering Task Force SIMPLE WG
Internet Draft J. Rosenberg
dynamicsoft
D. Willis
dynamicsoft
R. Sparks
dynamicsoft
B. Campbell
dynamicsoft
H. Schulzrinne
Columbia U.
J. Lennox
Columbia U.
C. Huitema
Microsoft
B. Aboba
Microsoft
D. Gurle
Microsoft
D. Oran
Cisco
draft-ietf-simple-presence-05.txt
March 1, 2002
Expires: September 2002
SIP Extensions for Presence
STATUS OF THIS MEMO
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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".
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
To view the list Internet-Draft Shadow Directories, see
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 1]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
Abstract
This document describes the usage of SIP for subscriptions and
notifications of user presence. User presence is defined as the
willingness and ability of a user to communicate with other users on
the network. Historically, presence has been limited to "on-line" and
"off-line" indicators; the notion of presence here is broader.
Subscriptions and notifications of user presence are supported by
defining an event package within the general SIP event notification
framework. This protocol is also compliant with the Common Presence
and Instant Messaging (CPIM) framework.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 2]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ........................................ 4
2 Terminology ......................................... 4
3 Definitions ......................................... 4
4 Overview of Operation ............................... 5
5 Usage of Presence URLs .............................. 7
6 Presence Event Package .............................. 8
6.1 Package Name ........................................ 8
6.2 Event Package Parameters ............................ 8
6.3 SUBSCRIBE bodies .................................... 8
6.4 Subscription Duration ............................... 9
6.5 NOTIFY Bodies ....................................... 9
6.6 Notifier Processing of SUBSCRIBE Requests ........... 9
6.6.1 Authentication ...................................... 10
6.6.2 Authorization ....................................... 11
6.7 Notifier Generation of NOTIFY Requests .............. 12
6.8 Subscriber Processing of NOTIFY Requests ............ 13
6.9 Handling of Forked Requests ......................... 14
6.10 Rate of Notifications ............................... 14
6.11 State Agents ........................................ 14
7 Publication ......................................... 16
7.1 Co-location ......................................... 16
7.2 REGISTER ............................................ 16
7.3 Uploading Presence Documents ........................ 17
8 Example message flow ................................ 17
9 Security considerations ............................. 20
9.1 Firewall and NAT Traversal .......................... 20
9.2 Privacy ............................................. 21
9.3 Message integrity and authenticity .................. 21
9.4 Outbound authentication ............................. 22
9.5 Replay prevention ................................... 22
9.6 Denial of service attacks ........................... 22
9.6.1 Smurf attacks through false contacts ................ 22
10 IANA Consideration .................................. 23
11 Acknowledgements .................................... 23
12 Authors Addresses ................................... 23
13 Normative References ................................ 25
14 Informative References .............................. 26
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 3]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
1 Introduction
Presence is (indirectly) defined in RFC 2778 [8] as subscription to
and notification of changes in the communications state of a user.
This communications state consists of the set of communications
means, communications address, and status of that user. A presence
protocol is a protocol for providing such a service over the Internet
or any IP network.
This document proposes the usage of the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) [1] for presence. This is accomplished through a concrete
instantiation of the general event notification framework defined for
SIP [2], and as such, makes use of the SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY methods
defined there. Specifically, this document defines an event package,
as described in [2]. User presence is particularly well suited for
SIP. SIP registrars and location services already hold aspects of
user presence information; it is uploaded to these devices through
REGISTER messages, and used to route calls to those users.
Furthermore, SIP networks already route INVITE messages from any user
on the network to the proxy that holds the registration state for a
user. As this state is user presence, those SIP networks can also
allow SUBSCRIBE requests to be routed to the same proxy. This means
that SIP networks can be reused to establish global connectivity for
presence subscriptions and notifications.
This event package is based on the concept of a presence agent, which
is a new logical entity that is capable of accepting subscriptions,
storing subscription state, and generating notifications when there
are changes in user presence. The entity is defined as a logical one,
since it is generally co-resident with another entity.
This event package is also compliant with the Common Presence and
Instant Messaging (CPIM) framework that has been defined in [3]. This
allows SIP for presence to easily interwork with other presence
systems compliant to CPIM.
2 Terminology
In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
"SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [4] and
indicate requirement levels for compliant implementations.
3 Definitions
This document uses the terms as defined in RFC 2778 [8].
Additionally, the following terms are defined and/or additionally
clarified:
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 4]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
Presence User Agent (PUA): A Presence User Agent manipulates
presence information for a presentity. This manipulation
can be the side effect of some other action (such as
sending a SIP REGISTER request to add a new Contact) or can
be done explicitly through the publication of presence
documents. We explicitly allow multiple PUAs per
presentity. This means that a user can have many devices
(such as a cell phone and PDA), each of which is
independently generating a component of the overall
presence information for a presentity. PUAs push data into
the presence system, but are outside of it, in that they do
not receive SUBSCRIBE messages, or send NOTIFY.
Presence Agent (PA): A presence agent is a SIP user agent which
is capable of receiving SUBSCRIBE requests, responding to
them, and generating notifications of changes in presence
state. A presence agent must have knowledge of the presence
state of a presentity. This means that it must have access
to presence data manipulated by PUAs for the presentity.
One way to do this is by co-locating the PA with the
proxy/registrar, or the presence user agent of the
presentity. However, this is not the only way, and this
specification makes no recommendations about where the PA
function should be located. A PA is always addressable with
a SIP URI that uniquely identifies the presentity (i.e,
sip:joe@example.com). There can be multiple PAs for a
particular presentity, each of which handles some subset of
the total subscriptions currently active for the
presentity. A PA is also a notifier (defined in [2] that
supports the presence events package.
Presence Server: A presence server is a physical entity that can
act as either a presence agent or as a proxy server for
SUBSCRIBE requests. When acting as a PA, it is aware of the
presence information of the presentity through some
protocol means. When acting as a proxy, the SUBSCRIBE
requests are proxied to another entity that may act as a
PA.
Presence Client: A presence client is a presence agent that is
co-located with a PUA. It is aware of the presence
information of the presentity because it is co-located with
the entity that manipulates this presence information.
4 Overview of Operation
In this section, we present an overview of the operation of this
event package. The overview describes behavior that is documented in
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 5]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
part here, in part within the SIP events framework [2], and in parth
in the SIP specification [1], in order to provide clarity on this
package for readers only casually familiar with those specifications.
However, the detailed semantics of this package require the reader to
be familiar with SIP events and the SIP specification itself.
When an entity, the subscriber, wishes to learn about presence
information from some user, it creates a SUBSCRIBE request. This
request identifies the desired presentity in the request URI, using a
SIP URI or a presence URL [3]. The subscription is carried along SIP
proxies as any other request would be. It eventually arrives at a
presence server, which can either terminate the subscription (in
which case it acts as the presence agent for the presentity), or
proxy it on to a presence client. If the presence client handles the
subscription, it is effectively acting as the presence agent for the
presentity. The decision at a presence server about whether to proxy
or terminate the SUBSCRIBE is a local matter; however, we describe
one way to effect such a configuration, using REGISTER.
The presence agent (whether in the presence server or presence
client) first authenticates the subscription, then authorizes it. The
means for authorization are outside the scope of this protocol, and
we expect that many mechanisms will be used. If authorized, a 200 OK
response is returned. If authorization could not be obtained at this
time, the subscription is considered "pending", and a 202 response is
returned. In both cases, the PA sends an immediate NOTIFY message
containing the state of the presentity and of the subscription. The
presentity state may be bogus in the case of a pending subscription,
indicating offline no matter what the state of the actual presentity,
for example. This is to protect the privacy of the presentity, who
may not want to reveal that they have not provided authorization for
the subscriber. As the state of the presentity changes, the PA
generates NOTIFYs for all subscribers with authorized subscriptions.
The state of the subscription itself is carried in the Subscription-
State header of the NOTIFY, and would typically indicate whether the
subscription is active or pending.
The SUBSCRIBE message establishes a "dialog" with the presence agent.
A dialog is defined in [1], and it represents the SIP state between a
pair of entities to facilitate peer-to-peer message exchanges. This
state includes the sequence numbers for messages in both directions
(SUBSCRIBE from the subscriber, NOTIFY from the presence agent), in
addition to a route set and remote URI. The route set is a list of
SIP (or SIPS) URIs which identify SIP proxy servers that are to be
visited along the path of SUBSCRIBE refreshes or NOTIFY requests. The
remote URI is the SIP or SIPS URI that identifies the target of the
message - the subscriber, in the case of NOTIFY, or the presence
agent, in the case of a SUBSCRIBE refresh.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 6]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
SIP provides a procedure called record-routing that allows for proxy
servers to request to be on the path of NOTIFY messages and/or
SUBSCRIBE refreshes. This is accomplished by inserting a URI into the
Record-Route header in the initial SUBSCRIBE request and/or response.
The subscription persists for a duration that is negotiated as part
of the initial SUBSCRIBE. The subscriber will need to refresh the
subscription before termination, if they wish to continue. This is
accomplished by sending a SUBSCRIBE refresh within the same dialog
established by the initial SUBSCRIBE. This SUBSCRIBE is nearly
identical to the initial one, but contains the dialog identifier,
different sequence numbers, and a set of Route headers that identify
the path of proxies the request is to take.
The subscriber can terminate the subscription by sending a SUBSCRIBE,
within the dialog, with an Expires header (which indicates duration
of the subscription) of zero. This causes an immediate termination of
the subscription. A NOTIFY request is generated by the presence agent
with the most recent state. In fact, behavior of the presence agent
for handing a SUBSCRIBE with Expires of zero is no different than for
any other expiration value; all SUBSCRIBE requests result in a
triggered NOTIFY with the current presentity and subscription state.
The presence agent can terminate the subscription at any time. To do
so, it sends a NOTIFY request with a Subscription-State header
indicating that the subscription has been terminated. A reason
parameter can be supplied which provides the reason.
5 Usage of Presence URLs
A presentity is identified in the most general way through a presence
URL [3], which is of the form pres:user@domain. These URLs are
protocol independent. They are resolved to protocol specific URIs,
such as a SIP or SIPS URI, through DNS procedures defined in [3].
When subscribing to a presentity, the subscription can be addressed
using the protocol independent form or the SIP or SIPS URI form. In
the SIP context, "addressed" refers to the Request-URI. It is
RECOMMENDED that if the entity sending a SUBSCRIBE is capable of
resolving the protocol independent form to the SIP form, this
resolution is done before sending the request. However, if the entity
is incapable of doing this translation, the protocol independent form
MAY be used in the Request-URI. Performing the translation as early
as possible means that these requests can be routed by SIP proxies
that are not aware of the presence namespace.
SUBSCRIBE messages also contain logical identifiers that define the
originator and recipient of the subscription (the To and From header
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 7]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
fields). These SHOULD contain SIP or SIPS URIs whenever possible, but
MAY contain a pres URL if a SIP or SIPS URI is not known or
available.
The Contact, Record-Route and Route fields do not identify logical
entities, but rather concrete ones used for SIP messaging. SIP [1]
specifies rules for their construction.
6 Presence Event Package
The SIP event framework [2] defines a SIP extension for subscribing
to, and receiving notifications of, events. It leaves the definition
of many additional aspects of these events to concrete extensions,
also known as event packages. This document qualifies as an event
package. This section fills in the information required by [2].
6.1 Package Name
The name of this package is "presence". As specified in [2], this
header appears in SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests.
Example:
Event: presence
6.2 Event Package Parameters
The SIP Event Framework allows event packages to define additional
parameters carried in the Event header for the specific package. This
package, presence, does not define any additional parameters.
6.3 SUBSCRIBE bodies
The body of a SUBSCRIBE request MAY contain a body. The purpose of
the body depends on its type. Subscriptions will normally not contain
bodies. The request URI, which identifies the presentity, combined
with the event package name, is sufficient for user presence.
We anticipate that document formats could be defined to act as
filters for subscriptions. These filters would request that only
certain user presence events that would generate notifies, or ask for
a restriction on the set of data returned in NOTIFY requests. For
example, a presence filter might specify that the notifications
should only be generated when the status of the users instant message
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 8]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
inbox changes. It might also say that the content of these
notifications should only contain the IM related information.
Honoring of these filters is at the policy discretion of the PA.
When no body is present, this specifies to the PA that no filter is
being requested, so that the PA is being requested to send all NOTIFY
requests that its own policy allows.
6.4 Subscription Duration
User presence changes as a result of many events. Some examples are:
o Turning on and off of a cell phone
o Modifying the registration from a softphone
o Changing the status on an instant messaging tool
These events are usually triggered by human intervention, and occur
with a frequency on the order of seconds to hours. As such,
subscriptions should have an expiration in the middle of this range,
which is roughly one hour. Therefore, the default expiration time for
subscriptions within this package is 3600 seconds. As per [2], the
subscriber MAY include an alternate expiration time.
6.5 NOTIFY Bodies
As described in [2], the NOTIFY message will contain bodies that
describe the state of the subscribed resource. This body is in a
format listed in the Accept header of the SUBSCRIBE, or a package-
specific default if the Accept header is omitted.
In this event package, the body of the notification contains a
presence document. This document describes the user presence of the
presentity that was subscribed to. All subscribers MUST support the
"application/cpim-pidf+xml" presence data format described in [5].
The subscribe request MAY contain an Accept header. If no such header
is present, it has a default value of "application/cpim-pidf+xml". If
the header is present, it MUST include "application/cpim-pidf+xml",
and MAY include any other types capable of representing user
presence, such as "message/cpim" as described in [5].
6.6 Notifier Processing of SUBSCRIBE Requests
Based on the proxy routing procedures defined in the SIP
specification, the SUBSCRIBE request will arrive at a presence agent
(PA). This subsection defines processing at the PA of a SUBSCRIBE
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 9]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
request.
If a PA gets a SUBSCRIBE request, and the Request-URI identifies a
user the PA is responsible for, but the To header does not, this
means that the SUBSCRIBE was forwarded for some reason. Whether the
PA is willing to accept subscriptions originally targeted to the user
in the To field is a matter of local policy. If a PA decides not to,
it SHOULD generate a 403 response.
User presence is highly sensitive information. Because the
implications of divulging presence information can be severe, strong
requirements are imposed on the PA regarding subscription processing,
especially related to authentication and authorization.
6.6.1 Authentication
A presence agent MUST authenticate all subscription requests. This
authentication can be done using any of the mechanisms defined in
[1].
In single-domain systems, where the subscribers all have shared
secrets with the PA in the domain, the combination of digest
authentication over TLS provides a secure and workable solution for
authentication. This use case is described in Section 26.3.2.1 of
[1]x.
In inter-domain scenarios, establishing an authenticated identity of
the subscriber is harder. It is anticipated that authentication will
often be established through transitive trust. Specifically, when
user A generates a SUBSCRIBE for B@bar.com, his domain (say, foo.com)
will use SIP proxy digest authentication, run over a TLS connection,
to identify him (see Section 26.3.2.1 of [1] for an example). The
SUBSCRIBE is forwarded to the target domain over a secure connection,
such as TLS (see Section 26.3.2.2 of [1] for an example of TLS-based
inter-domain security). The nature of the trust relationship between
bar.com and foo.com is that bar.com trusts that foo.com has
authenticated all subscribes it receives over that secure connection.
As such, the bar.com server need only verify that the SUBSCRIBE came
over the secure connection. The SIP extension for caller identity and
privacy [9] can be used to allow one domain to provide the
authenticated identity to another, even while maintaining privacy.
These mechanisms apply equally well to SUBSCRIBE requests for
presence.
A presentity can choose to represent itself with a SIPS URI. By
"represent itself", it means that the user represented by the
presentity hands out, on business cards, web pages, and so on, a SIPS
URI for their presentity. The semantics associated with this URI, as
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 10]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
described in [1], will force TLS usage on each hop between the
subscriber and the server in the domain of the URI. This provides
additional assurances (but no absolute guarantees) that identity has
been verified at each hop.
Another mechanism for authentication is S/MIME. Its usage with SIP is
described fully in [1]. If provides an end-to-end authentication
mechanism that can be used for a PA to establish the identity of the
subscriber.
6.6.2 Authorization
Once authenticated, the PA makes an authorization decision. A PA MUST
NOT accept a subscription unless authorization has been provided by
the presentity. The means by which authorization are provided are
outside the scope of this document. Authorization may have been
provided ahead of time through access lists, perhaps specified in a
web page. Authorization may have been provided by means of uploading
of some kind of standardized access control list document. Back end
authorization servers, such as a DIAMETER [10], RADIUS [11], or COPS
[12], can also be used. It is also useful to be able to query the
user for authorization following the receipt of a subscription
request for which no authorization information was present. The
"watcherinfo" event sub-package for SIP [13] defines a means by which
a presentity can become aware that a user has attempted to subscribe
to it, so that it can then provide an authorization decision.
Authorization decisions can be very complex. Ultimately, all
authorization decisions can be mapped into one of three states:
rejected, successful, and pending. Any subscription for which the
client is authorized to receive information about some subset of
presence state at some points in time is a successful subscription.
Any subscription for which the client will never receive any
information about any subset of the presence state is a rejected
subscription. Any subscription for which it is not known yet whether
it is successful or rejected is pending. Generally, pending occurs
when the server cannot obtain authorization at the time of the
subscription, and may be able to do so at a later time, when the
presentity becomes available.
The appropriate response codes for conveying a successful, rejected,
or pending subscription (200, 403 or 603, and 202, respectively) are
described in [2].
The SIP events framework allows the initial NOTIFY to contain no body
if the resource is not in a meaningful state. In the case of
presence, that NOTIFY MAY contain a presence document. This document
would indicate whatever presence state the subscriber has been
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 11]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
authorized to see; it is interpreted by the subscriber as the current
presence state of the presentity. For pending subscriptions, the
state of the presentity SHOULD include some kind of textual note that
indicates a pending status.
Polite blocking, as described in [14], is possible by generating a
200 OK to the subscription even though it has been rejected (or
marked pending). Of course, an immediate NOTIFY will still be sent.
The contents of the presence document in such a NOTIFY are at the
discretion of the implementor, but SHOULD be constructed in such a
way as to not reveal to the subscriber that their request has
actually been blocked. Typically, this is done by indicating
"offline" or equivalent status for a single contact address.
In many cases, it is useful for the response to the SUBSCRIBE to
provide the logical identity of the PA which generated the response.
This may not be the same as the user that the SUBSCRIBE was
originally targeted at, because of request forwarding. SIP extensions
have been defined to provide this capability [9].
6.7 Notifier Generation of NOTIFY Requests
The SIP Events specification details the formatting and structure of
NOTIFY messages. However, it leaves to packages the detailed
information about what events cause a NOTIFY to be sent, how to
compute the state information in the NOTIFY, how to generate neutral
or fake state information to hide authorization delays and decisions
from users, and whether state information is complete or deltas for
notifications.
A PA MAY send a NOTIFY at any time. Typically, it will send ones for
successful subscriptions when the state of the presentity changes.
The NOTIFY request MAY contain a body indicating the state of the
presentity. The times at which the NOTIFY is sent for a particular
subscriber, and the contents of the body within that notification,
are subject to any rules specified by the authorization policy that
governs the subscription. This protocol in no way limits the scope of
such policies. As a baseline, a reasonable policy is to generate
notifications when the state of any of the communications addresses
changes. These notifications contain the complete and current
presence state of the presentity as known to the presence agent.
Future extensions can be defined that allow a subscriber to request
that the notifications contain changes in presence information only,
rather than complete state.
In the case of a pending subscription, when final authorization is
determined, a NOTIFY SHOULD be sent. If the result of the
authorization decision was success, the NOTIFY SHOULD contain a
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 12]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
presence document with the current state of the presentity. If the
subscription is rejected, a NOTIFY MAY be sent. As described in [2],
the Subscription-State header can indicate the state of the
subscription.
The body of the NOTIFY MUST be sent using one of the types listed in
the Accept header in the most recent SUBSCRIBE request, or using the
type "application/cpim-pidf+xml" if no Accept header was present.
The means by which the PA learns the state of the presentity are also
outside the scope of this recommendation. Registrations can provide
one way, although the means (if any) by which a PA uses registrations
to construct a presence document are an implementation choice. If a
PUA wishes to explicitly inform the presence agent of its presence
state, it should explicitly upload the presence document (or its
piece of it) rather than attempting to manipulate their registrations
to achieve the desired result.
For reasons of privacy, it will frequently be necessary to encrypt
the contents of the notifications. This can be accomplished using
S/MIME. The encryption can be performed using the key of the
subscriber as identified in the From field of the SUBSCRIBE.
Similarly, integrity of the notifications is important to
subscribers. As such, the contents of the notifications MAY be
provide authentication and message integrity using S/MIME. Since the
NOTIFY are generated by the presence server, which may not have
access to the key of the user represented by the presentity, it will
frequently be the case that the NOTIFY are signed by a third party.
It is RECOMMENDED that the signature be by an authority over domain
of the presentity. In other words, for a user pres:user@example.com,
the signator of the NOTIFY SHOULD be the authority for example.com.
6.8 Subscriber Processing of NOTIFY Requests
The SIP Events framework [2] leaves it to event packages to describe
the process followed by the subscriber upon receipt of a NOTIFY
request, including any logic required to form a coherent resource
state.
In this specification, each NOTIFY contains either no presence
document, or a document representing the complete and coherent state
of the presentity. The presence document in the NOTIFY request with
the highest CSeq value is the current one. When no document is
present in that NOTIFY, the presence document present in the NOTIFY
with the next highest CSeq value is used. Extensions which specify
the use of partial state for presentities will need to dictate how
coherent state is achieved.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 13]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
6.9 Handling of Forked Requests
The SIP Events framework [2] requires each package to describe
handling of forked SUBSCRIBE requests.
This specification only allows a single dialog to be constructed as a
result of emitting an initial SUBSCRIBE request. This guarantees that
only a single PA is generating notifications for a particular
subscription to a particular presentity. The result of this is that a
presentity can have multiple PAs active, but these should be
homogeneous, so that each can generate the same set of notifications
for the presentity. Supporting heterogeneous PAs, each of which
generated notifications for a subset of the presence data, is complex
and difficult to manage. Doing so would require the subscriber to act
as the aggregator for presence data. This aggregation function can
only reasonably be performed by agents representing the presentity.
Therefore, if aggregation is needed, it MUST be done in a PA present
in a network server representing the presentity that has access to
the total set of user presence to be aggregated.
The required processing to guarantee that only a single dialog is
established is described in Section 5.4.9 of the SIP Events framework
[2].
6.10 Rate of Notifications
For reasons of congestion control, it is important that the rate of
notifications not become excessive. As a result, it is RECOMMENDED
that the PA not generate notifications for a single presentity at a
rate faster than once every 5 seconds.
6.11 State Agents
It is important to realize that the PA function can be colocated with
several elements:
o It can be co-located with the SIP registrar handling
registrations for the presentity (the co-location of the PA
within the proxy/registrar is known as a presence server). In
this way, the presence server knows the presence of the user
through registrations or other means.
o It can be co-located with a PUA for that presentity (the co-
location of the PA within the PUA is known as a presence
client). In the case of a single PUA per presentity, the PUA
knows the state of the presentity by sheer nature of its co-
location.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 14]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
o It can be co-located in any proxy along the request path. That
proxy can learn the presence state of the presentity by
generating its own SUBSCRIBE in order to determine it. In this
case, the PA is effectively a B2BUA. For this mechanism to be
effective, PUA need to act as PA. Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED
that all PUA be capable of acting as a PA for the state that
they manipulate, and that they authorize subscriptions that
can be authenticated as coming from the domain of the
presentity.
On occassion, it makes sense for the PA function to migrate from one
of these places to another. For example, for reasons of scale, the PA
function may reside in the presence server when the PUA is not
running, but when the PUA connects to the network, the PA decides to
migrate subscriptions to it in order to reduce state in the network.
The mechanism for accomplishing the migration is described in Section
4.3.5 of [2]. However, packages need to define under what conditions
such a migration would take place.
A PA MAY choose to migrate subscriptions at any time, through
configuration, or through dynamic means. One dynamic means for a
presence server to discover that the function can migrate to a PUA is
through the REGISTER message. Specifically, if a PUA wishes to
indicate support for the PA function, it SHOULD include a contact
address in its registration with a caller preferences "methods"
parameter listing SUBSCRIBE [6]. This indicates that it is capable of
terminating and processing SUBSCRIBE, and therefore can act as a PA.
However, just because a PUA indicates it can accept subscriptions,
does not mean a PA should migrate the subscriptions there. In
particular, a PA SHOULD NOT migrate the subscription if it is
composing aggregated presence documents from state received from
several PUA.
When the PA sends notifications to migrate subscriptions, it should
be wary of the load that this may cause. A PA SHOULD rate limit the
notifications, in order to avoid a flood of simultaneous re-
SUBSCRIBEs from all subscribers.
In the case where the subscription has migrated to the presence
server, the presence server will simply act as a PA for these new
subscriptions. In the case where the subscription has migrated from
the presence server to the PUA, the presence server MUST operate like
a proxy. Furthermore, it SHOULD implement the SIP Caller preferences
extension [6]. Because of the existence of a registered Contact with
a "methods" parameter containing SUBSCRIBE, the caller preferences
extension will cause the proxy to send the SUBSCRIBEs to that
Contact. Assuming it accepts, a 2xx is generated and forwarded to the
subscriber. The subscriber will now receive and accept notifications
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 15]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
from that PA. Because the "methods" parameter does not convey the set
of event packages for which the PUA can accept SUBSCRIBE, it is
possible that the PUA doesn't understand the presence event package,
and will therefore reject the subscription with a 489. In this case,
the presence server SHOULD NOT migrate any other subscriptions to
this PUA.
Migration of subscriptions will still work if the proxy does not
support the caller preferences extension. However, the proxy will
instead fork the SUBSCRIBE, possibly to Contacts which have not
indicated that they support SUBSCRIBE. The result will be 405
responses from those UAS. However, the one UAS which does support the
method will generate a 2xx class response (assuming the subscription
is accepted), and this will be correctly forwarded towards the
subscriber based on proxy response processing rules [1]. The penalty
of not supporting caller preferences is the additional unneeded SIP
traffic.
7 Publication
The user presence for a presentity can be obtained from any number of
different ways. None of these mechanisms are mandated by this
specification. The discussion here is for informational purposes
only.
7.1 Co-location
When the PA function is co-located with the PUA, user presence is
known directly by the PA.
7.2 REGISTER
Baseline SIP defines a method that is used by all SIP clients - the
REGISTER method. This method allows a UA to inform a SIP network of
its current communications addresses (ie., Contact addresses) .
Furthermore, multiple UA can independently register Contact addresses
for the same SIP URL. These Contact addresses can be SIP URLs, or
they can be any other valid URL.
Usage of REGISTER information to construct presence is only possible
if the PA is co-located with, or shares information with, the SIP
registrar. In this case, the combined PA/registrar/proxy is known as
a presence server.
Using the register information for presence is straightforward. The
address of record in the REGISTER (the To field) identifies the
presentity. The Contact headers define communications addresses that
describe the state of the presentity. The use of the SIP caller
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 16]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
preferences extension [6] is RECOMMENDED for use with UAs that are
interested in presence. It provides additional information about the
Contact addresses that can be used to construct a richer presence
document.
The presence of a registered Contact with a "methods" parameter [6]
listing the MESSAGE method implies that the presentity supports
instant messaging as a communications means.
The q values from the Contact header [1] can be used to establish
priorities amongst the various communications addresses in the
Contact headers.
The application of registered contacts to presence increases the
requirements for authenticity. Therefore, REGISTER requests used by
presence user agents SHOULD be authenticated using either SIP
authentication mechanisms, or a hop-by-hop mechanism.
7.3 Uploading Presence Documents
If a means exists to upload presence documents from PUA to the PA,
the PA can act as an aggregator and redistributor of those documents.
The PA, in this case, would take the presence documents received from
each PUA for the same presentity, and merge the communications means
across all of those PUA into a single presence document. Typically,
this aggregation would be accomplished through administrator or user
defined policies about how the aggregation should be done.
The specific means by which a presence document are uploaded to a
presence agent are outside the scope of this specification. When a
PUA wishes to have direct manipulation of the presence that is
distributed to subscribers, direct uploading of presence documents is
RECOMMENDED.
8 Example message flow
This message flow illustrates how the presence server can be the
responsible for sending notifications for a presentity. This flow
assumes that the watcher has previously been authorized to subscribe
to this resource at the server.
In this flow, the PUA informs the server about the updated presence
information though some non-SIP means.
When the value of the Content-Length header is "..." this means that
the value should be whatever the computed length of the body is.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 17]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
Watcher Server PUA
| F1 SUBSCRIBE | |
|------------------>| |
| F2 200 OK | |
|<------------------| |
| F3 NOTIFY | |
|<------------------| |
| F4 200 OK | |
|------------------>| |
| | |
| | Update presence |
| |<------------------ |
| | |
| F5 NOTIFY | |
|<------------------| |
| F6 200 OK | |
|------------------>| |
Message Details
F1 SUBSCRIBE watcher->example.com server
SUBSCRIBE sip:resource@example.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP watcherhost.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds7
To: <sip:resource@example.com>
From: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
CSeq: 1 SUBSCRIBE
Max-Forwards: 70
Event: presence
Accept: application/cpim-pidf+xml
Contact: <sip:user@watcherhost.example.com>
Expires: 600
Content-Length: 0
F2 200 OK example.com server->watcher
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP watcherhost.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds7
;received=192.0.2.1
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 18]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
To: <sip:resource@example.com>;tag=ffd2
From: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
CSeq: 1 SUBSCRIBE
Event: presence
Expires: 600
Contact: sip:example.com
Content-Length: 0
F3 NOTIFY example.com server-> watcher
NOTIFY sip:user@watcherhost.example.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP server.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
From: <sip:resource@example.com>;tag=ffd2
To: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
Event: presence
Subscription-State: active;expires=599
Max-Forwards: 70
CSeq: 1 NOTIFY
Content-Type: application/cpim-pidf+xml
Content-Length: ..
[PIDF Document]
F4 200 OK watcher-> example.com server
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP server.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
;received=192.0.2.2
From: <sip:resource@example.com>;tag=ffd2
To: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
CSeq: 1 NOTIFY
Content-Length: 0
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 19]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
F5 NOTIFY example.com server -> watcher
NOTIFY sip:user@watcherhost.example.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP server.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKna998sl
From: <sip:resource@example.com>;tag=ffd2
To: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
Event: presence
Subscription-State: active;expires=543
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Type: application/cpim-pidf+xml
Content-Length: ...
[New PIDF Document]
F6 200 OK
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP server.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKna998sl
;received=192.0.2.2
From: <sip:resource@example.com>;tag=ffd2
To: <sip:user@example.com>;tag=xfg9
Call-ID: 2010@watcherhost.example.com
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
Content-Length: 0
9 Security considerations
There are numerous security considerations for presence. Many are
outlined above; this section considers them issue by issue.
9.1 Firewall and NAT Traversal
It is anticipated that presence services will be used by clients and
presentities that are connected to proxy servers on the other side of
firewalls and NATs. Fortunately, since the SIP presence messages do
not establish independent media streams, as INVITE does, firewall and
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 20]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
NAT traversal is straightforward.
Specifically, the SIP extensions for NAT traversal [15] are directly
applicable to SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY, and will allow operation of the
protocol through NATs. Firewall administrators can set policies that
allow or disallow communications services by opening or closing
access to port 5060 (the default SIP port).
9.2 Privacy
Privacy encompasses many aspects of a presence system:
o Subscribers may not want to reveal the fact that they have
subscribed to certain users
o Users may not want to reveal that they have accepted
subscriptions from certain users
o Notifications (and fetch results) may contain sensitive data
which should not be revealed to anyone but the subscriber
Privacy is provided through a combination of hop-by-hop encryption
and end-to-end encryption. The hop-by-hop mechanisms provide scalable
privacy services, disable attacks involving traffic analysis, and
hide all aspects of presence messages. However, they operate based on
transitivity of trust, and they cause message content to be revealed
to proxies. The end-to-end mechanisms do not require transitivity of
trust, and reveal information only to the desired recipient. However,
end-to-end encryption cannot hide all information, and is susceptible
to traffic analysis. Strong end to end authentication and encryption
also requires that both participants have public keys, which is not
generally the case. Thus, both mechanisms combined are needed for
complete privacy services.
SIP allows any hop by hop encryption scheme, but TLS is mandatory to
implement for servers. Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that TLS [7] be
used between elements to provide this function. The details for
usage of TLS for server-to-server, and client-to-server security are
detailed in Section 26.3.2 of SIP [1].
SIP encryption, using S/MIME, MAY be used end-to-end for the
transmission of both SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests.
9.3 Message integrity and authenticity
It is important for the message recipient to ensure that the message
contents are actually what was sent by the originator, and that the
recipient of the message be able to determine who the originator
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 21]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
really is. This applies to both requests and responses of SUBSCRIBE
and NOTIFY. This is supported in SIP through end-to-end
authentication and message integrity. SIP provides http digest for
authentication, and S/MIME for authentication and integrity.
9.4 Outbound authentication
When local proxies are used for transmission of outbound messages,
proxy authentication is RECOMMENDED. This is useful to verify the
identity of the originator, and prevent spoofing and spamming at the
originating network.
9.5 Replay prevention
To prevent the replay of old subscriptions and notifications, all
signed SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests and responses MUST contain a
Date header covered by the message signature. Any message with a date
older than several minutes in the past, or more than several minutes
into the future, SHOULD be discarded.
Furthermore, all signed SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY requests MUST contain a
Call-ID and CSeq header covered by the message signature. A user
agent or presence server MAY store a list of Call-ID values, and for
each, the higest CSeq seen within that Call-ID. Any message that
arrives for a Call-ID that exists, whose CSeq is lower than the
highest seen so far, is discarded.
Finally, HTTP digest authentication MAY be used to prevent replay
attacks.
9.6 Denial of service attacks
Denial of service attacks are a critical problem for an open, inter-
domain, presence protocol. Here, we discuss several possible attacks,
and the steps we have taken to prevent them.
9.6.1 Smurf attacks through false contacts
Unfortunately, presence is a good candidate for smurfing attacks
because of its amplification properties. A single SUBSCRIBE message
could generate a nearly unending stream of notifications, so long as
a suitably dynamic source of presence data can be found. Thus, a
simple way to launch an attack is to send subscriptions to a large
number of users, and in the Contact header (which is where
notifications are sent), place the address of the target.
The only reliable way to prevent these attacks is through
authentication and authorization. End users will hopefully not accept
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 22]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
subscriptions from random unrecognized users. Also, the presence
client software could be programmed to warn the user when the Contact
header in a SUBSCRIBE is from a domain which does not match that of
the From field (which identifies the subscriber).
Also, note that as described in [2], if a NOTIFY is not acknowledged
or was not wanted, the subscription that generated it is removed.
This eliminates the amplification properties of providing false
Contact addresses.
10 IANA Consideration
This specification registers an event package, based on the
registration procedures defined in [2]. The following is the
information required for such a registration:
Package Name: presence
Package or Template-Package: This is a package.
Published Document: RFC XXXX (Note to RFC Editor: Please fill in
XXXX with the RFC number of this specification).
Person to Contact: Jonathan Rosenberg, jdrosen@jdrosen.net.
11 Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the following people for their support and
comments on this draft:
Rick Workman Nortel
Adam Roach dynamicsoft
Sean Olson Ericsson
Billy Biggs University of Waterloo
Stuart Barkley UUNet
Mauricio Arango Sun
Richard Shockey Neustar
Jorgen Bjorkner Hotsip
Henry Sinnreich MCI Worldcom
Ronald Akers Motorola
12 Authors Addresses
Jonathan Rosenberg
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 23]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
dynamicsoft
72 Eagle Rock Avenue
First Floor
East Hanover, NJ 07936
email: jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com
Dean Willis
dynamicsoft
5100 Tennyson Parkway
Suite 1200
Plano, Texas 75024
email: dwillis@dynamicsoft.com
Robert Sparks
dynamicsoft
5100 Tennyson Parkway
Suite 1200
Plano, Texas 75024
email: rsparks@dynamicsoft.com
Ben Campbell
5100 Tennyson Parkway
Suite 1200
Plano, Texas 75024
email: bcampbell@dynamicsoft.com
Henning Schulzrinne
Columbia University
M/S 0401
1214 Amsterdam Ave.
New York, NY 10027-7003
email: schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu
Jonathan Lennox
Columbia University
M/S 0401
1214 Amsterdam Ave.
New York, NY 10027-7003
email: lennox@cs.columbia.edu
Christian Huitema
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052-6399
email: huitema@microsoft.com
Bernard Aboba
Microsoft Corporation
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 24]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052-6399
email: bernarda@microsoft.com
David Gurle
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052-6399
email: dgurle@microsoft.com
David Oran
Cisco Systems
170 West Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
email: oran@cisco.com
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (c) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
13 Normative References
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 25]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
[1] J. Rosenberg, H. Schulzrinne, et al. , "SIP: Session initiation
protocol," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Feb.
2002. Work in progress.
[2] A. Roach et al. , "SIP-specific event notification," Internet
Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Feb. 2002. Work in progress.
[3] D. Crocker et al. , "A common profile for instant messaging
(CPIM)," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Nov. 2001.
Work in progress.
[4] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate requirement
levels," Request for Comments 2119, Internet Engineering Task Force,
Mar. 1997.
[5] H. Sugano, S. Fujimoto, et al. , "CPIM presence information data
format," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct. 2001.
Work in progress.
[6] H. Schulzrinne and J. Rosenberg, "SIP caller preferences and
callee capabilities," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task
Force, Nov. 2001. Work in progress.
[7] T. Dierks and C. Allen, "The TLS protocol version 1.0," Request
for Comments 2246, Internet Engineering Task Force, Jan. 1999.
14 Informative References
[8] M. Day, J. Rosenberg, and H. Sugano, "A model for presence and
instant messaging," Request for Comments 2778, Internet Engineering
Task Force, Feb. 2000.
[9] W. Marshall et al. , "SIP extensions for caller identity and
privacy," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Nov. 2001.
Work in progress.
[10] P. Calhoun, H. Akhtar, J. Arkko, E. Guttman, A. Rubens, and G.
Zorn, "Diameter base protocol," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering
Task Force, Nov. 2001. Work in progress.
[11] C. Rigney, S. Willens, A. Rubens, and W. Simpson, "Remote
authentication dial in user service (RADIUS)," Request for Comments
2865, Internet Engineering Task Force, June 2000.
[12] J. Boyle, R. Cohen, D. Durham, S. Herzog, R. Rajan, and A.
Sastry, "The COPS (common open policy service) protocol," Request for
Comments 2748, Internet Engineering Task Force, Jan. 2000.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 26]
Internet Draft presence March 1, 2002
[13] J. Rosenberg, "A SIP event sub-package for watcher information,"
Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, July 2001. Work in
progress.
[14] M. Day, S. Aggarwal, G. Mohr, and J. Vincent, "Instant messaging
/ presence protocol requirements," Request for Comments 2779,
Internet Engineering Task Force, Feb. 2000.
[15] J. Rosenberg, J. Weinberger, and H. Schulzrinne, "SIP extensions
for NAT traversal," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force,
Nov. 2001. Work in progress.
J. Rosenberg et. al. [Page 27]
