Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          A. Niemi
Request for Comments: 5839                                         Nokia
Category: Standards Track                                 D. Willis, Ed.
ISSN: 2070-1721                                        Softarmor Systems
                                                               May 2010


       An Extension to Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Events
                  for Conditional Event Notification

Abstract

  The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework enables
  receiving asynchronous notification of various events from other SIP
  user agents.  This framework defines the procedures for creating,
  refreshing, and terminating subscriptions, as well as fetching and
  periodic polling of resource state.  These procedures provide no
  tools to avoid replaying event notifications that have already been
  received by a user agent.  This memo defines an extension to SIP
  events that allows the subscriber to condition the subscription
  request to whether the state has changed since the previous
  notification was received.  When such a condition is true, either the
  body of a resulting event notification or the entire notification
  message is suppressed.

Status of This Memo

  This is an Internet Standards Track document.

  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
  (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
  received public review and has been approved for publication by the
  Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
  Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5839.













Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2010 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
  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.

  This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
  Contributions published or made publicly available before November
  10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
  material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
  modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
  Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
  the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
  outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
  not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
  it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
  than English.

























Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
    1.1.  Document Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
    1.2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
  2.  Motivations and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
    2.1.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
    2.2.  Problem Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
    2.3.  Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
  3.  Overview of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
  4.  Resource Model for Entity-Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
  5.  Subscriber Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
    5.1.  Detecting Support for Conditional Notification . . . . . . 13
    5.2.  Generating SUBSCRIBE Requests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
    5.3.  Receiving NOTIFY Requests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
    5.4.  Polling or Fetching Resource State . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
    5.5.  Resuming a Subscription  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
    5.6.  Refreshing a Subscription  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
    5.7.  Terminating a Subscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
    5.8.  Handling Transient Errors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
  6.  Notifier Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
    6.1.  Generating Entity-tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
    6.2.  Suppressing NOTIFY Bodies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
    6.3.  Suppressing NOTIFY Requests  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
    6.4.  State Differentials  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
    6.5.  List Subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
  7.  Protocol Element Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
    7.1.  204 (No Notification) Response Code  . . . . . . . . . . . 22
    7.2.  Suppress-If-Match Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
    7.3.  Grammar  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
  8.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
    8.1.  204 (No Notification) Response Code  . . . . . . . . . . . 23
    8.2.  Suppress-If-Match Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
  9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
  10. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
  11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
    11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
    11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24













Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


1.  Introduction

  The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) events framework provides an
  extensible facility for requesting notification of certain events
  from other SIP user agents.  This framework includes procedures for
  creating, refreshing, and terminating subscriptions, as well as the
  possibility to fetch or periodically poll the event resource.

  Several instantiations of this framework, called event packages have
  been defined, e.g., for presence [RFC3856], message waiting
  indications [RFC3842], and registrations [RFC3680].

  By default, every SUBSCRIBE request generates a NOTIFY request
  containing the latest event state.  Typically, a SUBSCRIBE request is
  issued by the subscriber whenever it needs a subscription to be
  installed, periodically refreshed, or terminated.  Once the
  subscription has been installed, the majority of the NOTIFYs
  generated by the subscription refreshes are superfluous; the
  subscriber usually is in possession of the event state already,
  except in the unlikely case where a state change exactly coincides
  with the periodic subscription refresh.  In most cases, the final
  event state generated upon terminating the subscription similarly
  contains resource state that the subscriber already has.

  Fetching or polling of resource state behaves in a similarly
  suboptimal way in cases where the state has not changed since the
  previous poll occurred.  In general, the problem lies with the
  inability to persist state across a SUBSCRIBE request.

  This memo defines an extension to optimize the SIP events framework.
  This extension allows a notifier to tag notifications (called entity-
  tags hereafter) and the subscriber to condition its subsequent
  SUBSCRIBE requests for actual changes since a notification carrying
  that entity-tag was issued.  The solution is similar to conditional
  requests defined in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [RFC2616],
  and follows the mechanism already defined for the PUBLISH [RFC3903]
  method for issuing conditional event publications.

  This memo is structured as follows.  Section 2 explains the
  background, motivations, and requirements for the work; Section 3
  gives a general overview of the mechanism; Section 4 explains the
  underlying model for resources and entities as they apply to
  conditional notification; Section 5 defines the subscriber behavior;
  Section 6 defines the notifier behavior; Section 7 includes the
  protocol element definitions; Section 8 includes the IANA
  considerations; and Section 9 includes the security considerations.





Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


1.1.  Document Conventions

  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 BCP 14, RFC 2119
  [RFC2119] and indicate requirement levels for compliant
  implementations.

1.2.  Terminology

  In addition to the terminology introduced in [RFC3261], [RFC3265],
  and [RFC3903], this specification uses these additional terms to
  describe the objects of conditional notification:

  resource
     An object identified by a URI whose resource state can be accessed
     using the SIP Event Notification framework.  There is a single
     authoritative notifier responsible for communicating the resource
     state.

  entity
     The representation of resource state.  An entity consists of the
     state data carried in the body of a NOTIFY message, as well as
     related meta-data in the message header.  There may be many
     versions of an entity, one current and the others stale.  Each
     version of an entity is identified by an entity-tag, which is
     guaranteed to be unique across all versions of all entities for a
     resource and event package.

2.  Motivations and Background

2.1.  Overview

  A SUBSCRIBE request creates a subscription with a finite lifetime.
  This lifetime is negotiated using the Expires header field, and
  unless the subscription is refreshed by the subscriber before the
  expiration is met, the subscription is terminated.  The frequency of
  these subscription refreshes depends on the event package, and
  typically ranges from minutes to hours.

2.2.  Problem Description

  The SIP events framework does not include different protocol methods
  for initiating and terminating of subscriptions, subscription
  refreshes, and fetches inside and outside of the SIP dialog.  The
  SUBSCRIBE method is overloaded to perform all of these functions.
  The difference between a fetch that does not create a (lasting)
  subscription and a SUBSCRIBE that creates one is in the Expires



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  header field value of the SUBSCRIBE; a zero-expiry SUBSCRIBE only
  generates a single NOTIFY, after which the subscription immediately
  terminates.  Lasting subscriptions typically have relatively short
  expiry periods, requiring periodic sending of new SUBSCRIBE requests
  in order to refresh the subscription.

  Each new SUBSCRIBE request generates a NOTIFY request containing the
  latest resource state.  Even if the state has not changed, it is sent
  again in response to each poll or subscription refresh.  This is very
  similar to the HTTP [RFC2616] problem of repeated GET operations on a
  resource.  HTTP solves the problem using conditional requests.  The
  server versions each entity with an entity-tag that identifies a
  specific instance of that entity.  Clients making GET requests can
  then include the entity-tag for the version of the entity that they
  believe to be current in an "If-None-Match" header field.  The server
  can compare this entity-tag to the entity it believes to be current
  and suppress resending the entity in the response if the server
  believes the client's version matches.  In other words, the server
  doesn't resend information that the client has already received.

  The SIP PUBLISH [RFC3903] method uses a similar mechanism, where a
  refresh of a publication is done by reference to its assigned entity-
  tag, instead of retransmitting the event state each time the
  publication expiration is extended.

2.3.  Requirements

  As a summary, here is the required functionality to solve the
  presented issues:

  REQ1:   It must be possible to suppress the NOTIFY request (or at a
          minimum, the event body therein) if the subscriber is already
          in possession of (or has previously received and discarded)
          the latest event state of the resource.

  REQ2:   This mechanism must apply to initial subscriptions in which
          the subscriber is attempting to resume an earlier
          subscription that has been paused.

  REQ3:   This mechanism must apply to refreshing a subscription.

  REQ4:   This mechanism must apply to terminating a subscription
          (i.e., an unsubscribe).

  REQ5:   This mechanism must apply to fetching or polling of resource
          state.





Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


3.  Overview of Operation

  Whenever a subscriber initiates a subscription, it issues a SUBSCRIBE
  request.  The SUBSCRIBE request is sent, routed, and processed by the
  notifier normally, i.e., according to the Session Initiation Protocol
  [RFC3261] and SIP-Specific Event Notification [RFC3265].

  If the notifier receiving the SUBSCRIBE request supports conditional
  subscriptions, it generates an entity-tag for the current entity, and
  includes it in a SIP-ETag header field of the NOTIFY request.  The
  entity-tag is unique across all versions of all entities for a
  resource and event package.  See Section 4 for more on this.

  Entity-tags are independent of subscriptions.  This allows
  notifications generated to a fetch or a poll to have valid entity-
  tags even across subsequent fetches or polls.

  The subscriber will store the entity-tag received in the notification
  along with the resource state.  It can then later use this entity-tag
  to make a SUBSCRIBE contain a condition in the form of a "Suppress-
  If-Match" header field.  Unlike the "If-Match" condition in a PUBLISH
  [RFC3903] request, which applies to whether the PUBLISH succeeds or
  returns an error, this condition applies to the stream of
  notifications that are sent after the SUBSCRIBE request has been
  processed.

  The Suppress-If-Match header field contains the last entity-tag seen
  by the subscriber.  This condition, if true, instructs the notifier
  to suppress either the body of a subsequent notification, or the
  entire notification.

  The condition is evaluated by matching the value of the header field
  against the entity-tag of the entity that would normally be sent in
  the associated NOTIFY message.  There is also a wildcard entity-tag
  with a special value of "*" that always matches.
















Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


     Subscriber                               Notifier
     ----------                               --------

     (1) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
         Expires: 3600
                         <--------       (2) 200 (or 202)

                         <--------       (3) NOTIFY
                                             Subscription-State: active
                                             SIP-ETag: ffee2
     (4) 200             -------->

          ... time passes ...

     (5) SUBSCRIBE       -------->                \ if "ffee2"
         Suppress-If-Match: ffee2                 |   matches
         Expires: 3600                            |   local
                                                  |   entity-tag
                                                  |
                         <--------       (6) 204  / then

        ... time passes and resource state (entity) changes...


                         <--------       (7) NOTIFY
                                             Subscription-State: active
                                             SIP-ETag: ca89a
     (8) 200             -------->


        ... time passes ...


     (9) SUBSCRIBE       -------->                \ if "ca89"
         Suppress-If-Match: ca89a                 |   matches
         Expires: 0                               |   local
                                                  |   entity-tag
                                                  |
                         <--------      (10) 204  / then

                     Figure 1: Example Message Flow

  Figure 1 describes a typical message flow for conditional
  notification:

  (1)   The subscriber initiates a subscription by sending a SUBSCRIBE
        request for a resource.




Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  (2)   After proper authentication and authorization, the notifier
        accepts the subscription.

  (3)   The notifier then immediately sends the initial event
        notification, including a unique entity-tag in a SIP-ETag
        header field.

  (4)   The subscriber accepts the notification and stores the entity-
        tag value along with the resource state.

  (5)   Later, the subscriber refreshes the subscription, and includes
        an entity-tag in a Suppress-If-Match header field.

  (6)   The notifier evaluates the condition by matching its local
        entity-tag value for the resource against the value of the
        Suppress-If-Match header field.  If the condition evaluates to
        true, the notifier informs the subscriber that the notification
        will not be sent.

  (7)   At some point, the state of the resource changes, e.g., the
        presence status of a user changes from online to busy.  This
        triggers an event notification with a new value in the SIP-ETag
        header field.

  (8)   The subscriber accepts the notification and stores the new
        entity-tag along with the resource state.

  (9)   After a while, the subscriber decides to terminate the
        subscription.  It adds a condition for Suppress-If-Match, and
        includes the entity-tag it received in the previous NOTIFY.

  (10)  The notifier evaluates the condition by matching its entity-tag
        for the resource against the value of the Suppress-If-Match
        header field.  If the condition evaluates to true, the notifier
        informs the subscriber that no notification will be sent.  This
        concludes the subscription.

  The benefit of using conditional notification in this example is in
  the reduction of the number of NOTIFY requests the subscriber can
  expect to receive.  Each event notification that the subscriber has
  already seen is suppressed by the notifier.  This example illustrates
  only one use case for the mechanism; the same principles can be used
  to optimize the flow of messages related to other event notification
  use cases.







Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


4.  Resource Model for Entity-Tags

  The key to understanding how conditional notification works is
  understanding the underlying resource model of event notification.
  In general, this model is similar to the resource model of HTTP with
  some key differences.  This section explains in detail the model as
  it applies to SIP events.  Figure 2 illustrates the model.

                    +-----+
    ............    |     |
    .          .    | URI |
    . Represen .    |     |
    . tation   .    +-----+
    .          .       |*
    ............       |
         .             |
         .             V
         .        +----------+            +---------+
      composition |          |*           |  Event  |
         +------<>| Resource |----------->| Package |<----.
         |        |          |            |         |     |
         |        +----------+            +----.----+     |
         |                                    /_\         |
         |*                                    | classification
     +--------+                                |          |
     |        |        .----------------.------'          |
     | Entity |        |                |                 |
     |        |        |                |                 |*
     +--------+   +----------+    +------------+     +----------+
         ^        |          |    |            |     |          |
         |        | Presence |    | Conference |     | Template |
         |        |          |    |            |     |          |
         |1..*    +----------+    +------------+     +----.-----+
    +---------+                                          /_\
    |         |                                           |
    | Version |                                           |
    |         |                                      +---------+
    +---------+                                      | Watcher |
         |1                                          |  Info   |
         |                                           |         |
         V                                           +---------+
    +---------+
    | Entity- |
    |   Tag   |
    |         |
    +---------+

                    Figure 2: Resource Model Diagram



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  For a given event package, there is a single authoritative agent
  responsible for zero or more resources.  That is, even for a
  distributed agent, the resource state is uniform across all
  instances.  The resource itself can be a list of resources [RFC4662].
  Conditional notification for list subscriptions is addressed in
  Section 6.5.

  A resource is identified by zero or more URIs, which can be SIP URIs,
  pres URIs [RFC3859], or similar.  Subscribers use this URI to
  subscribe to the resource for certain types of events, identified by
  the event package.

  With a successful subscription, a subscriber receives event
  notifications that communicate the resource state and the changes
  thereto.  Each event notification carries a representation of the
  current resource state.  This representation is influenced by many
  factors, e.g., authorization and filtering rules, and the event
  composition rules of the notifier.

  This representation is realized in an "entity".  Each resource may be
  associated with zero or more entities.  For example, there may be
  multiple subscribers to the presence information of a single user (a
  resource), and each subscriber may have a different filtered view of
  that resource, producing one entity per subscriber.  However, each
  entity is associated with one and only one resource; there is no
  "compositing" of resources at the entity level.  Resources may
  themselves be made up of information from other resources (be
  "composite resources"), but this does not change the one-resource-
  per-entity rule.

  An entity consists of the data carried in the body of a NOTIFY
  message and related meta-data in the message header.  Whenever the
  data in the body or any of the meta-data changes, the notifier MUST
  produce a new entity-tag.  This meta-data MUST include, but is not
  limited to the following SIP header fields defined in the Session
  Initiation Protocol [RFC3261] and SIP Specific Event Notification
  [RFC3265]:

     1.  Content-Disposition

     2.  Content-Encoding

     3.  Content-Language

     4.  Content-Length

     5.  Content-Type




Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


     6.  Event

  Note that the Subscription-State is explicitly not part of the
  entity.  In the future, event packages may define additional fields
  that implementations need to consider as part of the entity.

  An entity has one or more versions of which only one is current and
  all others stale.  Each version has an entity-tag, which uniquely
  identifies it across all versions of all entities pertaining to a
  single resource and event package.

  Note that two entity-tags for different resources being equal does
  not indicate identical entities.  In other words, if an entity-tag
  received for a subscription to a first resource matches an entity-tag
  received for a subscription to a second resource, the subscriber
  cannot assume that the two entity values are equal.

  With partial event notification, the NOTIFY message only carries the
  delta state, or the set of changes to the previous version of the
  entity.  In that case, implementations MUST consider the full event
  state as the version of the entity to which the entity-tag in the
  NOTIFY message applies.

  The conditional notification mechanism is independent of the way in
  which subscriptions are installed.  In other words, the mechanism
  supports implicit subscriptions, such as those associated with the
  REFER method [RFC3515].

  It is possible that the same resource is in some shape or form
  accessible through another mechanism in addition to SIP Event
  Notification, e.g., HTTP or the SIP PUBLISH method.  In general,
  implementations MUST NOT expect the entity-tags to be shared between
  the mechanisms, unless event packages or specific applications of SIP
  events explicitly define such dependencies.

5.  Subscriber Behavior

  This section augments the subscriber behavior defined in RFC 3265
  [RFC3265].  It first discusses general issues related to indicating
  support for the mechanism (Section 5.1) and creating conditions in
  SUBSCRIBE requests (Section 5.2).  Next, it describes subscriber
  behavior for receiving NOTIFY requests (Section 5.3), and specific
  client workflows for polling resource state (Section 5.4), resuming a
  subscription (Section 5.5), refreshing a subscription (Section 5.6),
  and terminating a subscription (Section 5.7).  Finally, handling of
  transient errors is discussed (Section 5.8).





Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


5.1.  Detecting Support for Conditional Notification

  The mechanism defined in this memo is backwards compatible with SIP
  events [RFC3265] in that a notifier supporting this mechanism will
  insert a SIP entity-tag in its NOTIFY requests, and a subscriber that
  understands this mechanism will know how to use it in creating a
  conditional request.

  Unaware subscribers will simply ignore the entity-tag, make requests
  without conditions, and receive the default treatment from the
  notifier.  Unaware notifiers will simply ignore the conditional
  header fields and continue normal operation.

5.2.  Generating SUBSCRIBE Requests

  When creating a conditional SUBSCRIBE request, the subscriber MUST
  include a single conditional header field including an entity-tag in
  the request.  The condition is evaluated by comparing the entity-tag
  of the subscribed resource with the entity-tag carried in the
  conditional header field.  If they match, the condition evaluates to
  true.

  Unlike the condition introduced for the SIP PUBLISH [RFC3903] method,
  these conditions do not apply to the SUBSCRIBE request itself, but to
  the resulting NOTIFY requests.  When true, the condition drives the
  notifier to change its behavior with regard to sending the
  notifications after the SUBSCRIBE.

  This specification defines a new header field called Suppress-If-
  Match.  This header field introduces a condition to the SUBSCRIBE
  request.  If true, it instructs the notifier either to omit the body
  of the resulting NOTIFY message (if the SUBSCRIBE is not sent within
  an existing dialog) or to suppress (i.e., block) the NOTIFY request
  that would otherwise be triggered by the SUBSCRIBE (for an
  established dialog).  In the latter case, the SUBSCRIBE message will
  be answered with a 204 (No Notification) response.  As long as the
  condition remains true, it also instructs the notifier either to
  suppress any subsequent NOTIFY request or, if there are reportable
  changes in the NOTIFY header, e.g., the Subscription-State has
  changed, to suppress the body of any subsequent NOTIFY request.

  If the condition is false, the notifier follows its default behavior.

  If the subscriber receives a 204 (No Notification) response to an in-
  dialog SUBSCRIBE, the subscriber MUST consider the event state and
  the subscription state unchanged.





Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  The value of the Suppress-If-Match header field is an entity-tag,
  which is an opaque token that the subscriber simply copies (byte-
  wise) from a previously received NOTIFY request.  Inclusion of an
  entity-tag in a Suppress-If-Match header field of a SUBSCRIBE request
  indicates that the client has a copy of, or is capable of recreating
  a copy of, the entity associated with that entity-tag.

  Example:

     Suppress-If-Match: b4cf7

  The header field can also be wildcarded using the special "*" entity-
  tag value.  Such a condition always evaluates to true regardless of
  the value of the current entity-tag for the resource.

  Example:

     Suppress-If-Match: *

  Such a wildcard condition effectively quenches a subscription; the
  only notifications received are those reporting changes to the
  subscription state and those in response to a SUBSCRIBE message sent
  outside of an existing dialog.  In both cases, the notifications will
  not contain a body.

     A subscription with a wildcard Suppress-If-Match condition is
     useful in scenarios where the subscriber wants to temporarily put
     a subscription in dormant mode.  For example, a host may want to
     conserve bandwidth and power when it detects from screen or input
     device inactivity that the user isn't actively monitoring the
     presence statuses of contacts.

5.3.  Receiving NOTIFY Requests

  When a subscriber receives a NOTIFY request that contains a SIP-ETag
  header field, it MUST store the entity-tag if it wishes to make use
  of the conditional notification mechanism.  The subscriber MUST be
  prepared to receive a NOTIFY with any entity-tag value, including a
  value that matches any previous value that the subscriber might have
  seen.

  The subscriber MUST NOT infer any meaning from the value of an
  entity-tag; specifically, the subscriber MUST NOT assume identical
  entities (i.e., event state) for NOTIFYs with identical entity-tag
  values when those NOTIFYs result from subscription to different
  resources.





Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


     Note that there are valid cases for which identical entity-tag
     values on different resources may occur.  For example, it is
     possible to generate entity-tag values using a one-way hash
     function, resulting in the possibility that two different
     resources having the same entity-value will also have the same
     entity-tag.  Clients however MUST NOT assume that this is the
     case, as the algorithm for the generation of entity-tags is
     notifier-dependent and not negotiated with the subscriber.
     Consequently, the subscriber cannot differentiate between two
     entity-tags that have the same value because they are similar
     hashes of identical entities, or because two notifiers happen to
     have used the same sequential number as an entity-tag.  Entity
     tags are only required to be unique for a given resource, not
     globally unique.

5.4.  Polling or Fetching Resource State

  Polling with conditional notification allows a user agent to
  efficiently poll resource state.  This is accomplished using the
  Suppress-If-Match condition:































Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 15]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  Subscriber                               Notifier
  ----------                               --------

 (1) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
     Expires: 0
                     <--------       (2) 202

                     <--------       (3) NOTIFY
                                         Subscription-State: terminated
                                         SIP-ETag: f2e45
                                         Content-Length: 17539

 (4) 200             -------->


 ... poll interval elapses ...


 (5) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
     Suppress-If-Match: f2e45
     Expires: 0
                     <--------       (6) 202

                     <--------       (7) NOTIFY
                                         Subscription-State: terminated
                                         SIP-ETag: f2e45
                                         Content-Length: 0

 (8) 200             -------->

                    Figure 3: Polling Resource State

  (1)  The subscriber polls for resource state by sending a SUBSCRIBE
       with zero expiry (expires immediately).

  (2)  The notifier accepts the SUBSCRIBE with a 202 (Accepted)
       response.

  (3)  The notifier then immediately sends a first (and last) NOTIFY
       request with the current resource state and the current entity-
       tag in the SIP-ETag header field.

  (4)  The subscriber accepts the notification with a 200 (OK)
       response.

  (5)  After some arbitrary poll interval, the subscriber sends another
       SUBSCRIBE with a Suppress-If-Match header field that includes
       the entity-tag received in the previous NOTIFY.



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 16]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  (6)  The notifier accepts the SUBSCRIBE with a 202 (Accepted)
       response.  (202 would be used to indicate that the subscription
       request was understood without also indicating that it was
       authorized, as per Section 3.1.6.1 of SIP-Specific Event
       Notification [RFC3265].)

  (7)  Since the resource state has not changed since the previous poll
       occurred, the notifier sends a NOTIFY message with no body.  It
       also mirrors the current entity-tag of the resource in the SIP-
       ETag header field.

  (8)  The subscriber accepts the notification with a 200 (OK)
       response.

5.5.  Resuming a Subscription

  Resuming a subscription means the ability to continue an earlier
  subscription that either closed abruptly or was explicitly
  terminated.  When resuming, the subscription is established without
  transmitting the resource state.  This is accomplished with
  conditional notification and the Suppress-If-Match header field:

         Subscriber                               Notifier
         ----------                               --------

     (1) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
         Suppress-If-Match: ega23
         Expires: 3600
                         <--------       (2) 202

                         <--------       (3) NOTIFY
                                             Subscription-State: active
                                             SIP-ETag: ega23
                                             Content-Length: 0
     (4) 200             -------->

                    Figure 4: Resuming a Subscription

  (1)  The subscriber attempts to resume an earlier subscription by
       including a Suppress-If-Match header field with the entity-tag
       it last received.

  (2)  The notifier accepts the subscription after proper
       authentication and authorization, by sending a 202 (Accepted)
       response.






Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 17]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  (3)  Since the condition is true, the notifier then immediately sends
       an initial NOTIFY request that has no body.  It also mirrors the
       current entity-tag of the resource in the SIP-ETag header field.

  (4)  The subscriber accepts the NOTIFY and sends a 200 (OK) response.

  Had the entity-tag not been valid any longer, the condition would
  have evaluated to false, and the NOTIFY would have had a body
  containing the latest resource state.

5.6.  Refreshing a Subscription

  To refresh a subscription using conditional notification, the
  subscriber creates a subscription refresh before the subscription
  expires, and uses the Suppress-If-Match header field:

         Subscriber                               Notifier
         ----------                               --------

         (1) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
             Suppress-If-Match: aba91
             Expires: 3600

                             <--------       (2) 204
                                                 Expires: 3600

                   Figure 5: Refreshing a Subscription

  (1)  Before the subscription expires, the subscriber sends a
       SUBSCRIBE request that includes the Suppress-If-Match header
       field with the latest entity-tag it has seen.

  (2)  If the condition evaluates to true, the notifier sends a 204 (No
       Notification) response and sends no NOTIFY request.  The Expires
       header field of the 204 (No Notification) response indicates the
       new expiry time.

5.7.  Terminating a Subscription

  To terminate a subscription using conditional notification, the
  subscriber creates a SUBSCRIBE request with a Suppress-If-Match
  condition:









Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 18]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


         Subscriber                               Notifier
         ----------                               --------

         (1) SUBSCRIBE       -------->
             Suppress-If-Match: ega23
             Expires: 0

                             <--------       (2) 204

                  Figure 6: Terminating a Subscription

  (1)  The subscriber decides to terminate the subscription and sends a
       SUBSCRIBE request with the Suppress-If-Match condition with the
       entity-tag it has last seen.

  (2)  If the condition evaluates to true, the notifier sends a 204 (No
       Notification) response, which concludes the subscription, and
       the subscriber can clear all state related to the subscription.

5.8.  Handling Transient Errors

  This section is non-normative.

  In some deployments, there may be Back-to-Back User Agent (B2BUA)
  devices that track SIP dialogs such as subscription dialogs.  These
  devices may be unaware of the conditional notification mechanism.

  It is possible that some B2BUA devices may treat a NOTIFY with
  suppressed body as an error, or may expect all SUBSCRIBE messages to
  have an associated NOTIFY message.

  In general, there is very little that an endpoint can do to recover
  from such transient errors.  The most that can be done is to try to
  detect such errors, and define a fallback behavior.

  If subscribers encounter transient errors in conditional
  notification, they should disable the feature and fall back to normal
  subscription behavior.













Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 19]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


6.  Notifier Behavior

  This section augments the notifier behavior as specified in RFC 3265
  [RFC3265].

6.1.  Generating Entity-tags

  An entity-tag is a token carried in the SIP-ETag header field, and it
  is opaque to the client.  The notifier is free to decide on any means
  for generating the entity-tag.  It can have any value, except for
  "*".  For example, one possible method is to implement the entity-tag
  as a simple counter, incrementing it by one for each generated
  notification per resource.

  A notifier MUST generate entity-tags for event notifications of all
  resources for which it is responsible.  The entity-tag MUST be unique
  across all versions of all entities for each state of a resource as
  reported by a given event package.  Otherwise said, for any
  subscription or sequence of subscriptions to a specific resource
  using a singular event package, each entity-tag produced MUST map to
  one and only one presentation of resource state (entity).  Two
  identical entities for a specific resource might or might not have
  identical entity-tags; this decision is left to the notifier.

  An entity-tag is considered valid for as long as the entity exists.
  An entity becomes stale when its version is no longer the current
  one.  The notifier MUST remember (or be able to recalculate) the
  entity-tag of an entity as long as the version of the entity is
  current.  The notifier MAY remember the entity-tag longer than this,
  e.g., for implementing journaled state differentials (Section 6.4).

  The entity-tag values used in publications are not necessarily shared
  with the entity-tag values used in subscriptions.  This is because
  there may not always be a one-to-one mapping between a publication
  and a notification of state change; there may be several sources to
  the event composition process, and a publication into a resource may
  not affect the resulting entity.

6.2.  Suppressing NOTIFY Bodies

  When a condition in a SUBSCRIBE request for suppressing notifications
  is true (i.e., the local entity-tag for the resource state and the
  entity-tag in a Suppress-If-Match header field are byte-wise
  identical) but there are reportable changes in the NOTIFY header
  (e.g., the Subscription-State has changed), the notifier MUST
  suppress the body of the NOTIFY request.  That is, the resulting
  NOTIFY contains no Content-Type header field, the Content-Length is
  set to zero, and no payload is attached to the message.



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 20]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  Additionally, when a condition in a SUBSCRIBE request for suppressing
  notifications is true and the SUBSCRIBE message is not sent within an
  established dialog, the notifier MUST send a NOTIFY request with a
  suppressed entity body.

  Suppressing the entity body of a NOTIFY does not change the current
  entity-tag of the resource.  Hence, the NOTIFY MUST contain a SIP-
  ETag header field that contains the unchanged entity-tag of the
  resource state.

  A Suppress-If-Match header field that includes an entity-tag with the
  value of "*" MUST always evaluate to true.

6.3.  Suppressing NOTIFY Requests

  When a condition in a SUBSCRIBE request to suppress notifications is
  true (i.e., the local entity-tag of the resource and the entity-tag
  in a Suppress-If-Match header field match), and the SUBSCRIBE is sent
  within an established dialog, then the notifier MUST suppress the
  resulting NOTIFY request, and generate a 204 (No Notification)
  response.  As long as the condition remains true, and there are no
  reportable changes in the NOTIFY header, all subsequent NOTIFY
  requests MUST also be suppressed.

  Notifiers MUST NOT suppress a NOTIFY unless the corresponding
  SUBSCRIBE message was sent in an established dialog.

  A successful conditional SUBSCRIBE request MUST extend the
  subscription expiry time.

  Suppressing the entire NOTIFY has no effect on the entity-tag of the
  resource.  In other words, it remains unchanged.

  A Suppress-If-Match header field that includes an entity-tag with the
  value of "*" MUST always evaluate to true.

6.4.  State Differentials

  Some event packages support a scheme where notifications contain
  state differentials, or state deltas [RFC3265], instead of complete
  resource state.

  Further extensions could define means for notifiers to keep track of
  the state changes of a resource, e.g., storing the changes in a
  journal.  If a condition fails, the notifier would then send a state
  differential in the NOTIFY rather than the full state of the event
  resource.  This is only possible if the event package and the
  subscriber both support a payload format that has this capability.



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 21]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  When state differentials are sent, the SIP-ETag header field MUST
  contain an entity-tag that corresponds to the full resource state.

6.5.  List Subscriptions

  The Event Notification Extension for Resource Lists [RFC4662] defines
  a mechanism for subscribing to a homogeneous list of resources using
  the SIP events framework.

  A list subscription delivers event notifications that contain both
  Resource List Meta-Information (RLMI) documents as well as the
  resource state of the individual resources on the list.

  Implementations MUST consider the full resource state of a resource
  list including RLMI and the entity-header as the entity to which the
  entity-tag applies.

7.  Protocol Element Definitions

  This section describes the protocol extensions required for
  conditional notification.

7.1.  204 (No Notification) Response Code

  The 204 (No Notification) response code indicates that the request
  was successful, but the notification associated with the request will
  not be sent.  It is valid only in response to a SUBSCRIBE message
  sent within an established dialog.

  The response code is added to the "Success" production rule in the
  SIP [RFC3261] message grammar.

7.2.  Suppress-If-Match Header Field

  The Suppress-If-Match header field is added to the definition of the
  "message-header" rule in the SIP [RFC3261] grammar.  Its use is
  described in Sections 5, 6.3, and 6.2.

  This header field is allowed to appear in any request, but its
  behavior is only defined for the SUBSCRIBE request.

7.3.  Grammar

  This section defines the formal syntax for extensions described in
  this memo in Augmented BNF (ABNF) [RFC5234].  The rules defined here
  augment and reference the syntax defined in RFC 3261 [RFC3261] and
  RFC 3903 [RFC3903].




Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 22]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  Success            =/ "204"  ;  No Notification

        ; Success is defined in RFC 3261.

  message-header     =/ Suppress-If-Match

        ; message-header is defined in RFC 3261.

  Suppress-If-Match  =  "Suppress-If-Match" HCOLON ( entity-tag / "*" )

        ; entity-tag is defined in RFC 3903.

8.  IANA Considerations

  This document registers a new response code and a new header field
  name.

8.1.  204 (No Notification) Response Code

  This document registers a new response code.  This response code is
  defined by the following information, which has been added to the
  methods and response-codes sub-registry available from
  http://www.iana.org.

  This information has been added under "Successful 2xx" category.

                   +---------------------+-----------+
                   | Response Code       | Reference |
                   +---------------------+-----------+
                   | 204 No Notification | [RFC5839] |
                   +---------------------+-----------+

8.2.  Suppress-If-Match Header Field

  This document registers a new SIP header field called Suppress-If-
  Match.  This header field is defined by the following information,
  which has been added to the header fields sub-registry available from
  http://www.iana.org.

               +-------------------+---------+-----------+
               | Header Name       | Compact | Reference |
               +-------------------+---------+-----------+
               | Suppress-If-Match |         | [RFC5839] |
               +-------------------+---------+-----------+







Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 23]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


9.  Security Considerations

  The security considerations for SIP event notification are
  extensively discussed in RFC 3265 [RFC3265].  This specification
  introduces an optimization to SIP event notification, which in itself
  does not alter the security properties of the protocol.

10.  Acknowledgments

  The following people have contributed corrections and suggestions to
  this document: Adam Roach, Sean Olson, Johnny Vrancken, Pekka Pessi,
  Eva Leppanen, Krisztian Kiss, Peili Xu, Avshalom Houri, David
  Viamonte, Jonathan Rosenberg, Qian Sun, Dale Worley, Tolga Asveren,
  Brian Stucker, Eric Rescorla, Arun Arunachalam, and the SIP and
  SIMPLE working groups.

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.

  [RFC3265]  Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific
             Event Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002.

  [RFC3903]  Niemi, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
             for Event State Publication", RFC 3903, October 2004.

  [RFC5234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
             Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.

11.2.  Informative References

  [RFC2616]  Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
             Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
             Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.

  [RFC3515]  Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer
             Method", RFC 3515, April 2003.

  [RFC3680]  Rosenberg, J., "A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event
             Package for Registrations", RFC 3680, March 2004.



Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 24]

RFC 5839               Entity-Tags for SIP Events               May 2010


  [RFC3842]  Mahy, R., "A Message Summary and Message Waiting
             Indication Event Package for the Session Initiation
             Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3842, August 2004.

  [RFC3856]  Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
             Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.

  [RFC3859]  Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)",
             RFC 3859, August 2004.

  [RFC4662]  Roach, A., Campbell, B., and J. Rosenberg, "A Session
             Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for
             Resource Lists", RFC 4662, August 2006.

Authors' Addresses

  Aki Niemi
  Nokia
  P.O. Box 407
  NOKIA GROUP, FIN  00045
  Finland

  Phone: +358 50 389 1644
  EMail: [email protected]


  Dean Willis (editor)
  Softarmor Systems
  3100 Independence Pkwy #311-164
  Plano, TX  75075
  USA

  Phone: +1 214 504 1987
  EMail: [email protected]

















Niemi & Willis               Standards Track                   [Page 25]