RFC 3762

RFC 3762: Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service Registration for H.323 💖

okay bestie, here's the title block tea ☕✨

• Network Working Group 🌸
• Author: Orit Levin, Microsoft Corporation 💅
• Category: Standards Track 🦋
• Date: April 2004 📅
• Obsoletes: none listed 🙈
• Updates: none listed 🧚

Status of this Memo 📜

this one is an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and it's literally asking everyone for discussion and suggestions for improvements 🫶 check 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, so share away 💜

Copyright Notice ©️

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 🔒

Abstract ✨

the H.323 spec is all about building multimedia communication services over an arbitrary Packet Based Network, the Internet included 🌐 this doc registers a Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) service for H.323, following the specs and guidelines in RFC 3761. the whole thing is giving registration era 💅

Table of Contents 🗂️

1.  Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.  ENUM Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.  The E2U+H323 ENUM Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4.  Conventions Used in this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7.  References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
    7.1.  Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
    7.2.  Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
8.  Author's Address. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
9.  Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1. Introduction 🌷

the H.323 spec [2] is the blueprint for multimedia communication services over any Packet Based Network, the Internet very much included 🌐 when H.323 is running on the Internet, it would be useful to take advantage of services like domain name system (DNS) and ENUM 🤩 that helps facilitate the completion of multimedia calls, which is iconic behavior honestly 📞

this doc registers an ENUM service for H.323 according to the specifications and guidelines in RFC 3761 [3] 🎀

2. ENUM Service Registration 📝

as defined in [3], here's the template covering the info needed for registering the enumservice specified in this doc 💖

-  Service Name: "E2U+H323"
-  URI Scheme(s): "h323:"
-  Functional Specification: see section "3. The E2U+H323 ENUM
   Service"
-  Security considerations: see section "5. Security Considerations"
-  Intended usage: COMMON
-  Author: Orit Levin
-  Any other information that the author deems interesting: None

3. The E2U+H323 ENUM Service 🧚

this doc defines the E2U+H323 service, which goes in the "service" sub-field of the "enumservice" as defined in [3] 🦋

the H.323 related ENUM record MUST be populated with a standard H.323 URL as defined in [2]. ngl this is the main rule, so no skipping it 🫶 this URL MAY include parameters that specify the protocols and transport means the H.323 entity supports, so it can flex a little 💅

the H.323 entity MUST fully comply with the procedures defined in [3] for both record retrieval and processing by the DNS client. no half-stepping, periodt 💀

if an ENUM DNS lookup gives back an H.323 URL that matches local policies and capabilities, the procedure in section O.8.1 "Locating H.323 Destination" of [5] SHOULD be performed. it's giving "strongly recommended" energy 🔥

4. Conventions used in this document 📚

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 [1] 🌈

5. Security Considerations 🚨

okay, this section is SERIOUS 😭 the h323-URL info, once it's populated in the DNS, effectively becomes publicly accessible. so yes, everyone can see it, which is wild 👀 the access to the H.323 destinations published using ENUM can be secured by the techniques and procedures defined in H.235 [4], the security framework for H.323. that framework defines ways to achieve integrity, authentication, non-repudiation, encryption, and more for H.323 calls 🔐 an analysis of threats specific to ENUM's dependence on the DNS, and how applicable DNSSEC [6] is to them, is provided in [3]. read it, bestie 🙏

6. IANA Considerations 🏛️

this doc registers the E2U+H323 ENUM service according to the specifications and guidelines in RFC 3761 [3] and the definitions in this document ✅

7. References 📖

7.1. Normative References 🌟

• [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
• [2] "Packet-based multimedia communications systems", ITU-T Recommendation H.323, 2003.
• [3] Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004.
• [4] "Security and encryption for H-Series(H.323 and other H.245-based) multimedia terminals", ITU-T Recommendation H.235, 2003.
• [5] "Usage of URLs and DNS", ITU-T Recommendation H.323 Annex O, 2003.

7.2. Informative References 💜

• [6] R. Arends, et al., "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Extensions", Work in Progress, February 2004.

8. Author's Address 💌

Orit Levin
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
USA

EMail:  oritl@microsoft.com

9. Full Copyright Statement 🎀

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). this document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth there, the authors keep all their rights 🫶

this document and the info in it are provided on an "AS IS" basis, and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY 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. legal stuff, but it matters 💅

---

Intellectual Property 🦋

the IETF takes no position on 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 on whether any license under those rights might or might not be available. it also doesn't claim to have made any independent effort to identify such rights. info on the procedures for rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79 📜

copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat, any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt to get a general license or permission for implementers or users to use these proprietary rights can be found on the IETF online 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 required to implement this standard. send that info to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org 💌

Acknowledgement 🙏

funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society 💖