Tech-invite3GPPspaceIETF RFCsSIP
9190898887868584838281807978777675747372717069686766656463626160595857565554535251504948474645444342414039383736353433323130292827262524232221201918171615141312111009080706050403020100
in Index   Prev   Next

RFC 8498

A P-Served-User Header Field Parameter for an Originating Call Diversion (CDIV) Session Case in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

Pages: 15
Informational
Updates:  5502

Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 1
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         M. Mohali
Request for Comments: 8498                                        Orange
Updates: 5502                                              February 2019
Category: Informational
ISSN: 2070-1721


             A P-Served-User Header Field Parameter for an
         Originating Call Diversion (CDIV) Session Case in the
                   Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

Abstract

The P-Served-User header field was defined based on a requirement from the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) in order to convey the identity of the served user, his/ her registration state, and the session case that applies to that particular communication session and application invocation. A session case is metadata that captures the status of the session of a served user regardless of whether or not the served user is registered or the session originates or terminates with the served user. This document updates RFC 5502 by defining a new P-Served-User header field parameter, "orig-cdiv". The parameter conveys the session case used by a proxy when handling an originating session after Call Diversion (CDIV) services have been invoked for the served user. This document also fixes the ABNF in RFC 5502 and provides more guidance for using the P-Served-User header field in IP networks. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. 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). Not all documents approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8498.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 2
Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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
   (https://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.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 3

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Basic Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.3. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Proxy Behavior and Parameter Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Clarification of RFC 5502 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.2. ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. Call Flow Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. Call Diversion Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.2. Call Diversion and Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1. Introduction

1.1. General

The P-Served-User header field [RFC5502] was defined based on a requirement from the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) in order to convey the identity of the served user, his/her registration state, and the session case between a Serving Call Session Control Function (S-CSCF) and an Application Server (AS) on the IMS Service Control (ISC) interface. A session case is metadata that captures the status of the session of a served user regardless of whether or not the served user is registered or the session originates or terminates with the served user. For more information on session cases and the IMS, a detailed description can be found in [TS.3GPP.24.229]. [RFC5502] defines the originating and terminating session cases for a registered or unregistered user. This document extends the P-Served- User header field to include the session case for a forwarded leg when both a CDIV service has been invoked and an originating service of the diverting user has to be triggered.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 4
   The sessioncase-param parameter of the P-Served-User header field is
   extended with the "orig-cdiv" parameter for this originating-after-
   CDIV session case.

   The following section defines usage of the "orig-cdiv" parameter of
   the P-Served-User header field, Section 3 discusses the applicability
   and scope of this new header field parameter, and Section 4 specifies
   the proxy behavior for handling the new header field parameter.
   Section 5 clarifies some of the [RFC5502] procedures, Section 6
   describes the extended syntax and corrects the syntax of [RFC5502],
   Section 7 gives some call flow examples, Section 8 registers the
   P-Served-User header field parameters with IANA, and Section 9
   discusses the security properties of the environment where this new
   header field parameter is intended to be used.

1.2. Basic Use Case

In the 3GPP IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem), the S-CSCF (Serving CSCF) is a SIP proxy that serves as a registrar and handles originating and terminating session states for users assigned to it. This means that any call that is originated by a specific user or any call that is terminated to that specific user will pass through the S-CSCF that is assigned to that user. At the moment that an S-CSCF is assigned to a specific user, the user profile is downloaded from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS) to that S-CSCF; see [TS.3GPP.29.228]. The user profile contains the list of actions to be taken by the S-CSCF for the served user depending on the session direction (originating or terminating) and the user state (registered or not) in the IMS network. With this user profile, the S-CSCF determines the current case and applies the corresponding actions such as forwarding the request to an AS. The AS then goes through a similar process of determining who is the current served user, what is his/her "registration state", and what is the "session case" of the session. [RFC5502] defines all those parameters and in particular the originating and terminating session cases. In basic call scenarios, there is no particular issue for the S-CSCF and AS to know which scenario needs to be realized, but in case of CDIV services for which the session is re-targeted, the session cases defined in [RFC5502] pose some limitations as described in the following section.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 5

1.3. Problem Statement

To illustrate the problem statement, let's imagine Alice trying to call Bob and Bob having a CDIV service activated towards Carol's address. In the case of a CDIV service, the received request is first treated as a terminating session case (at Bob's side), and the terminating filter criteria configured in the S-CSCF is performed. A filter criteria is information in the user profile that determines whether an initial request is sent to a particular AS. When the AS receives the call initiation request, the AS is able to determine the served user (Bob) and the session case (here "term") from the received P-Served-User header field content and is able to execute terminating services. When the CDIV service is executed (as a terminating service of Bob), the AS changes the target (Request-URI) of the session (toward Carol's address) and a new call leg is created. The served user becomes the diverting user. This new call leg could be considered as an originating call leg from the diverting user (Bob), but this is not the case. Indeed, the originating user remains the same (Alice), and some of the diverting user's originating services should not be triggered as if it was an originating call. For instance, the originating user identity (Alice) should not be restricted because the diverting user (Bob) has a privacy service for his own identity. The privacy of the diverting user should apply to information related to this user only (e.g., in the History-Info header field). In the same manner, some specific services will need to be triggered on the outgoing leg after a CDIV. Without a dedicated session case for originating-after-CDIV, the S-CSCF cannot trigger an originating service for the diverting user, nor can an AS execute the procedures for this particular session case. For this use case, this document creates a new parameter ("orig-cdiv") for the originating-after-CDIV session case to be embedded in the P-Served-User header field.

2. Conventions and Terminology

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 6

3. Applicability

The use of the P-Served-User header field extensions is only applicable inside a Trust Domain [RFC3324] for the P-Served-User header field. Nodes in such a Trust Domain explicitly trust each other to convey the served user and to be responsible for withholding that information outside of the Trust Domain. The means by which the network determines the served user and the policies that are executed for a specific served user is outside the scope of this document.

4. Proxy Behavior and Parameter Handling

The following section illustrates how this header field parameter can be used in a 3GPP network. For a terminating call, the following steps will be followed: 1. The S-CSCF receives the initial INVITE request for a terminating call and determines that the session case is for a terminating user as described in [RFC5502]. 2. The S-CSCF determines who is the served user by looking at the Request-URI and saves the current Request-URI. 3. The S-CSCF analyzes the filter criteria. It then sends the request to the AS of the served user as an INVITE that includes the P-Served-User header field with the "sescase" parameter set to "term" and the "regstate" set to the corresponding value in order to trigger execution of terminating services. 4. Based on some criteria, the AS concludes that the request has to be diverted to another target user or application. The AS replaces the received Request-URI with the new diverted-to address and stores the successive Request-URI(s) values by adding one or two History-Info header field entry(ies) [RFC7044] in the outgoing INVITE. In the History-Info header field, the served user address is tagged by using the mp-param header field parameter added in the newly created entry that contains the diverted-to address. The AS forwards the INVITE request back to the S-CSCF. 5. When receiving back the INVITE request, the S-CSCF can see that the topmost Route header field contains its own hostname, but the Request-URI does not match the saved Request-URI. In this case, the S-CSCF updates the P-Served-User header field content by replacing the "sescase" parameter with the "orig-cdiv" parameter. The P-Served-User header field value remains unchanged.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 7
   6.  The S-CSCF forwards the INVITE request to an AS that hosts the
       served user's (diverting user's) originating services, which need
       to be executed on the forwarded leg after a CDIV service.

   7.  When the AS receives the INVITE request, it determines that the
       session case is for the "orig-cdiv" session case and performs the
       originating services to be executed after retargeting for the
       diverting user (i.e., served user).

5. Clarification of RFC 5502 Procedures

This document provides the following guidance for the handling of the P-Served-User header field that is missing in [RFC5502]: o The P-Served-User header field MUST NOT be repeated within a request for a particular session at a particular time for the reason that session cases are mutually exclusive. This document updates [RFC5502] to clearly state that the P-Served-User header field MUST NOT contain multiple values either comma-separated or header-separated. This document also updates the syntax of the header from [RFC5502] to reflect this uniqueness of parameter values. o [RFC5502] does not clearly state what to do with the received P-Served-User header field when a call is diverted to another destination. This document highlights that there are several ways of handling the P-Served-User header field: the S-CSCF could store the previous "regstate" value and decide that the same value applies, the "regstate" may no longer be relevant after a diverting service so the S-CSCF removes it, or the "regstate" could be combined with the "orig-cdiv" session case to provide different services depending on whether the served user is registered or unregistered. These choices are implementation dependent.

6. Syntax

6.1. General

[RFC5502] defines the P-Served-User header field with the sessioncase-param parameter "sescase", which is specified as having "orig" and "term" as predefined values. This document defines an additional parameter, "orig-cdiv", for the sessioncase-param. Because this document extends the existing sessioncase-param parameter, and because errors have been identified in the syntax, this document corrects and extends the P-Served-User header field.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 8
   The extension of the sessioncase-param parameter to add the
   "orig-cdiv" session case is done in a way that fits the parameter
   format introduced in Release 11 of the 3GPP [TS.3GPP.24.229] and
   maintains backward compatibility.

   "EQUAL", "HCOLON", "SEMI", "name-addr", "addr-spec", and
   "generic-param" are defined in [RFC3261].

   If the "addr-spec" contains a comma, question mark, or semicolon, the
   "name-addr" form MUST be used.  The "name-addr" form requires the use
   of angle brackets (< and >).

6.2. ABNF

The Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234] syntax of the P-Served-User header field is described in [RFC5502]. This document updates [RFC5502] to correct the P-Served-User header field ABNF syntax and extend it as the following: P-Served-User = "P-Served-User" HCOLON PServedUser-value *(SEMI served-user-param) served-user-param = sessioncase-param / registration-state-param / generic-param PServedUser-value = name-addr / addr-spec sessioncase-param = "sescase" EQUAL ("orig"/"term")/ orig-cdiv registration-state-param = "regstate" EQUAL ("unreg" / "reg") orig-cdiv = "orig-cdiv" Examples of possible P-Served-User header fields: P-Served-User: <sip:user@example.com>; orig-cdiv; regstate=reg or P-Served-User: <sip:user@example.com>; orig-cdiv or P-Served-User: <sip:user@example.com>; sescase=term; regstate=unreg This document allows choosing between "addr-spec" and "name-addr" when constructing the header field value. As specified in RFC 8217, the "addr-spec" form MUST NOT be used if its value would contain a comma, semicolon, or question mark [RFC8217].
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 9

7. Call Flow Examples

7.1. Call Diversion Case

The following call flow shows a session establishment when Alice calls Bob, who has a CDIV service that diverts to Carol when Bob is busy. proxy server UA Alice Bob's...S-CSCF-B..........AS-B.............Bob Carol | | | | | | INVITE F1 | | | | |--------------->| INVITE F2 | | | | |--------------->| | | | | INVITE F3 | | | | |<---------------| INVITE F4 | | | |-------------------------------->| | | | 486 F5 | | | |<--------------------------------| | | | 486 F6 | | | | |--------------->| | | | | INVITE F7 | | | | |<---------------| | | | | INVITE F8 | | | | |--------------->| | | | | INVITE F9 | | | | |<---------------| INVITE F10 | | |------------------------------------------------->| | | | | | | | | | 180 F11 | | | | 180 F12 |<---------------| | | 180 F13 |<---------------| | | 180 F14 |<---------------| | | |<---------------| | | | | | | | | [Alice calls Bob] F1 INVITE Alice -> S-CSCF-B INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0 From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774 To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com> F2 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> AS-B INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0 From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774 To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com> P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 10
   F3 INVITE AS-B -> S-CSCF-B
   INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg

   F4 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> Bob
   INVITE sip:bob@192.0.2.4 SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg

[Bob is busy. His CDIV when busy is invoked towards Carol]

   F5-F6 486 BUSY Bob -> S-CSCF-B  -> AS-B
   486 BUSY
    From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>;tag=es43sd

[Alice's call is diverted to Carol]

   F7 INVITE AS-B -> S-CSCF-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg

[The forwarded leg to Carol is identified as an originating call after
CDIV, which should not trigger all of Bob's originating services]

   F8 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> AS-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; orig-cdiv; regstate=reg

   F9 INVITE AS-B -> S-CSCF-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; orig-cdiv; regstate=reg

   F10 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> Carol
   INVITE sip:carol@192.0.2.7 SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com>

             Figure 1. P-Served-User During CDIV Service
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 11

7.2. Call Diversion and Privacy

The following call flow shows a CDIV use case for which Alice has no identity restriction service and Bob has an unconditional CDIV service towards Carol and an identity presentation restriction service. proxy server UA Alice Bob's...S-CSCF-B..........AS-B.............Bob Carol | | | | | | INVITE F1 | | | | |--------------->| INVITE F2 | | | | |--------------->| | | | | INVITE F3 | | | | |<---------------| | | | | INVITE F4 | | | | |--------------->| | | | | INVITE F5 | | | | |<---------------| INVITE F6 | | | |------------------------------------------------->| | | | | | | | | | 180 F7 | | | | 180 F8 |<---------------| | | 180 F9 |<---------------| | | 180 F10 |<---------------| | | |<---------------| | | | | | | | | [Alice calls Bob] F1 INVITE Alice -> S-CSCF-B INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0 From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774 To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com> Supported: histinfo F2 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> AS-B INVITE sip:bob@example.com SIP/2.0 From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774 To: Bob <sip:bob@example.com> P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 12
[Bob's unconditional CDIV to Carol is triggered]

   F3 INVITE AS-B -> S-CSCF-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Carol <sip:carol@domainc.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; term; regstate=reg
        History-Info:
                <sip:bob@example.com>;index=1,
                <sip:carol@domainc.com;cause=302>;index=1.1;mp=1

[Alice's call is diverted to Carol]

   F4 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> AS-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Carol <sip:carol@domainc.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; orig-cdiv; regstate=reg
        History-Info:
                <sip:bob@example.com>;index=1,
                <sip:carol@domainc.com;cause=302>;index=1.1;mp=1

   F5 INVITE AS-B -> S-CSCF-B
   INVITE sip:carol@domainc.com SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Carol <sip:carol@domainc.com>
        P-Served-User: <sip:bob@example.com>; orig-cdiv; regstate=reg
        History-Info:
                <sip:bob@example.com?privacy=history>;index=1,
                <sip:carol@domainc.com;cause=302>;index=1.1;mp=1

[Forwarded leg to Carol is identified as an originating call after
CDIV that allows Bob's privacy service to be applied to his
identity within the History-Info header field]

   F6 INVITE S-CSCF-B -> Carol
   INVITE sip:carol@192.0.2.7 SIP/2.0
        From: Alice <sip:alice@domaina.com>;tag=1928301774
        To: Carol <sip:carol@domainc.com>
        History-Info:
                <sip:bob@example.com?privacy=history>;index=1,
                <sip:carol@domainc.com;cause=302>;index=1.1;mp=1
                <sip:carol@192.0.2.7>;index=1.1.1;rc=1.1

            Figure 2. P-Served-User When Privacy Requested
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 13

8. IANA Considerations

The syntax of the P-Served-User header field [RFC5502] is updated in Section 4 of this document. IANA has updated the existing row for the P-Served-User header field in the "Header Fields" subregistry within the "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Parameters" registry: Header Name Compact Form Reference ------------- ------------ ------------------ P-Served-User none [RFC5502][RFC8498] IANA has added new rows for the P-Served-User header field parameters in the "Header Field Parameters and Parameter Values" subregistry within the "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Parameters" registry (as per the registry created by [RFC3968]): Header Field Parameter Name Predefined Values Reference -------------- ---------------- ----------------- ------------- P-Served-User sescase Yes [RFC5502] P-Served-User regstate Yes [RFC5502] P-Served-User orig-cdiv No [RFC8498]

9. Security Considerations

The security considerations in [RFC5502] apply. As the "orig-cdiv" parameter of the P-Served-User header field can be used to trigger applications when a call is diverted, it is important to ensure that the parameter has not been added to the SIP message by an unauthorized SIP entity. Thus, the P-Served-User header field is to be used in a trusted environment, and proxies MUST NOT insert the header unless they have sufficient knowledge that the route set includes another trusted proxy.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 14

10. References

10.1. Normative References

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC3324] Watson, M., "Short Term Requirements for Network Asserted Identity", RFC 3324, DOI 10.17487/RFC3324, November 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3324>. [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>. [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. [RFC8217] Sparks, R., "Clarifications for When to Use the name-addr Production in SIP Messages", RFC 8217, DOI 10.17487/RFC8217, August 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8217>. [RFC3968] Camarillo, G., "The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) Header Field Parameter Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", BCP 98, RFC 3968, DOI 10.17487/RFC3968, December 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3968>. [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>. [RFC7044] Barnes, M., Audet, F., Schubert, S., van Elburg, J., and C. Holmberg, "An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information", RFC 7044, DOI 10.17487/RFC7044, February 2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7044>.
Top   ToC   RFC8498 - Page 15
   [RFC5502]  van Elburg, J., "The SIP P-Served-User Private-Header
              (P-Header) for the 3GPP IP Multimedia (IM) Core Network
              (CN) Subsystem", RFC 5502, DOI 10.17487/RFC5502, April
              2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5502>.

10.2. Informative References

[TS.3GPP.24.229] 3GPP, "IP multimedia call control protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP);Stage 3", 3GPP TS 24.229 11.28.0, December 2018. [TS.3GPP.29.228] 3GPP, "IP Multimedia (IM) Subsystem Cx and Dx interfaces; Signalling flows and message contents", 3GPP TS 29.228 15.1.0, September 2018.

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank the 3GPP community for providing guidance, input, and comments on the document. Thanks to Dale Worley, Jean Mahoney, and Ben Campbell for their careful review of the document. Thanks to Paul Kyzivat and Adam Roach. A special thanks to Christer Holmberg.

Author's Address

Marianne Mohali Orange Orange Gardens, 44 avenue de la Republique Chatillon 92326 France Email: marianne.mohali@orange.com