Network Working Group                                       A. Mayrhofer
Request for Comments: 4979                                       enum.at
Category: Standards Track                                    August 2007


               IANA Registration for Enumservice 'XMPP'

Status of This Memo

  This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
  Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
  improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
  Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
  and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

  This document requests IANA registration of an Enumservice for XMPP,
  the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol.  This Enumservice
  specifically allows the use of 'xmpp' Uniform Resource Identifiers
  (URIs) in the context of E.164 Number Mapping (ENUM).

Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
  2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
  3.  Enumservice Registration - XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
  4.  XMPP IRI/URI Considerations for ENUM  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
    4.1.  Authority Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
    4.2.  IRI-to-URI mapping  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
  5.  Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
  6.  Security and Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
  7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
  8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
  9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5










Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


1.  Introduction

  E.164 Number Mapping (ENUM) [1] uses the Domain Name System (DNS) [6]
  to refer from E.164 numbers [7] to Uniform Resource Identifiers
  (URIs) [3].  Specific services to be used with ENUM must be
  registered with IANA.  Section 3 of RFC 3761 describes the process of
  such an Enumservice registration.

  The Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) [9] provides
  means for streaming Extensible Markup Language (XML) [8] elements
  between endpoints in close to real time.  The XMPP framework is
  mainly used to provide instant messaging, presence, and streaming
  media services.

  RFC 4622 [5] registers a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) scheme for
  identifying an XMPP entity as a URI or as an Internationalized
  Resource Identifier (IRI) [4].  The Enumservice specified in this
  document allows the provisioning of such "xmpp" URIs (and the URI
  representations of "xmpp" IRIs) in ENUM.

2.  Terminology

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [2].

3.  Enumservice Registration - XMPP

  The following template contains information required for the IANA
  registrations of the 'XMPP' Enumservice, according to Section 3 of
  RFC 3761:

  Enumservice Name: "XMPP"

  Enumservice Type: "xmpp"

  Enumservice Subtype: n/a

  URI Schemes: "xmpp"

  Functional Specification:

     This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified is an XMPP
     entity.

  Security Considerations: see Section 6





Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


  Intended Usage: COMMON

  Author: Alexander Mayrhofer <[email protected]>

4.  XMPP IRI/URI Considerations for ENUM

4.1.  Authority Component

  XMPP IRIs/URIs optionally contain an "Authority Component" (see
  Section 2.3 of RFC 4622).  The presence of such an Authority
  Component in an IRI/URI signals the processing application to
  authenticate as the user indicated in the URI/IRI rather than using
  the preconfigured identity.

  In the context of this Enumservice, arbitrary clients may discover
  and use the XMPP URIs/IRIs associated to an E.164 number.  Hence, in
  most cases, those clients will not be able to authenticate as
  requested in the Authority Component.

  Therefore, URIs/IRIs that result from processing an XMPP Enumservice
  record SHOULD NOT contain an Authority Component.

4.2.  IRI-to-URI mapping

  While XMPP supports IRIs as well as 'plain' URIs, ENUM itself
  supports only the use of URIs for Enumservices.

  Therefore, XMPP IRIs MUST be mapped to URIs for use in an XMPP
  Enumservice record.  The mapping MUST follow the procedures outlined
  in Section 3.1 of RFC 3987.

5.  Example

  An example ENUM entry referencing to a XMPP URI could look like:

            $ORIGIN 6.9.4.0.6.9.4.5.1.1.4.4.e164.arpa.
            @  IN NAPTR  ( 100 10 "u"
                           "E2U+xmpp"
                           "!^.*$!xmpp:[email protected]!" .
                         )











Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


6.  Security and Privacy Considerations

  General security considerations of the protocols on which this
  Enumservice registration is based are addressed in Sections 3.1.3 and
  6 of RFC 3761 (ENUM) and Section 14 of RFC 3920 (XMPP).

  Since ENUM uses DNS -- a publicly available database -- any
  information contained in records provisioned in ENUM domains must be
  considered public as well.  Even after revoking the DNS entry and
  removing the referred resource, copies of the information could still
  be available.

  Information published in ENUM records could reveal associations
  between E.164 numbers and their owners -- especially if IRIs/URIs
  contain personal identifiers or domain names for which ownership
  information can be obtained easily.

  However, it is important to note that the ENUM record itself does not
  need to contain any personal information.  It just points to a
  location where access to personal information could be granted.

  ENUM records pointing to third-party resources can easily be
  provisioned on purpose by the ENUM domain owner -- so any assumption
  about the association between a number and an entity could therefore
  be completely bogus unless some kind of identity verification is in
  place.  This verification is out of scope for this memo.

7.  IANA Considerations

  This memo requests IANA to add a new "XMPP" Enumservice to the
  'Enumservice Registrations' registry, according to the definitions in
  this document and RFC 3761 [1].

  The required template is contained in Section 3.

8.  Acknowledgements

  Some text from RFC 4622 was used in the Introduction of this
  document.  Charles Clancy, Miguel Garcia, Andrew Newton, Jon
  Peterson, and Peter Saint-Andre provided extensive reviews and
  valuable feedback.










Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

  [1]  Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource
       Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
       Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004.

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

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

  [4]  Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource
       Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, January 2005.

  [5]  Saint-Andre, P., "Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs)
       and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) for the Extensible
       Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)", RFC 4622, July 2006.

9.2.  Informative References

  [6]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
       specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.

  [7]  ITU-T, "The international public telecommunication numbering
       plan", Recommendation E.164 (02/05), Feb. 2005.

  [8]  Maler, E., Paoli, J., Bray, T., Yergeau, F., and C. Sperberg-
       McQueen, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Third Edition)",
       World Wide Web Consortium FirstEdition REC-xml-20040204,
       February 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204>.

  [9]  Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
       Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 3920, October 2004.














Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


Author's Address

  Alexander Mayrhofer
  enum.at GmbH
  Karlsplatz 1/2/9
  Wien  A-1010
  Austria

  Phone: +43 1 5056416 34
  EMail: [email protected]
  URI:   http://www.enum.at/








































Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4979                    XMPP Enumservice                 August 2007


Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

  This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
  contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
  retain all their rights.

  This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
  OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
  THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

  The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
  Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
  pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
  this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
  might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
  made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
  on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
  found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

  Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
  assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
  attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
  such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
  specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
  http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

  The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
  copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
  rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
  this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
  [email protected].

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
  Internet Society.







Mayrhofer                   Standards Track                     [Page 7]