Signaling Transport (sigtran)
-----------------------------
Charter
Last Modified: 2006-03-24
Current Status: Active Working Group
Chair(s):
Lyndon Ong <lyong@ciena.com>
Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Director(s):
Jon Peterson <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Advisor:
Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Technical Advisor(s):
Shawn Routhier <sar@epilogue.com>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion:sigtran@ietf.org
To Subscribe: sigtran-request@ietf.org
In Body: subscribe email_address
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sigtran/index.html
Description of Working Group:
The primary purpose of this working group will be to address the
transport of packet-based PSTN signaling over IP Networks, taking into
account functional and performance requirements of the PSTN signaling.
For interworking with PSTN, IP networks will need to transport
signaling
such as Q.931 or SS7 ISUP messages between IP nodes such as a
Signaling
Gateway and Media Gateway Controller or Media Gateway.
Examples of such transport include:
- transport of signaling between a Signaling Gateway and Media
Gateway
or Media Gateway Controller
- transport of signaling ("backhaul") from a Media Gateway to a Media
Gateway Controller
- transport of TCAP between a Signaling Gateway and other IP nodes
Applications include:
- Internet dial-up remote access
- IP telephony interworking with PSTN
- Other services as identified
Specific goals are:
1. Architecture and Performance Requirements: The working group will
produce an informational RFC identifying functionality and
performance requirements to support signaling over IP. Signaling
messages have very stringent loss and delay requirements in the
existing telephone networks that need to be supported.
2- Transport: The working group will produce a standards track
proposal or proposals defining transport of signaling protocols
using SCTP, based on the requirements identified above.
These proposals will identify the method of encapsulation of different
signaling protocols. This will include differentiating between
different protocols being carried, and what components are
transported,
translated or terminated at the SG. Security and resilience must be
addressed.
Note: TCAP is a transaction protocol with different functions and
requirements than call control signaling. This will need to be
taken into account in its mapping to IP networks.
This work will be done in conjunction with other IETF working
groups looking at similar issues. The working group will also
ensure that good information conduits exist with groups in other
standards groups with expertise in the relevant signaling
protocols or in the network requirements for the transport of
the
relevant signaling protocols.
The group will make use of existing IETF QoS and security technology
and
will not address creation of new QoS or security functions for IP
networks. Nor will the working group work on defining new call control
or device control protocols.
Goals and Milestones:
Done Submit Initial draft of Signaling Architecture and Performance
Requirements document as an Internet-Draft
Done Issue initial IDs on Transport Layer Protocols and
Encapsulation of Signaling Protocols
Done Submit requirements document to IESG for publication as an RFC
Done Submit revised version of drafts incorporating discussions and
early implementation experience.
Done Submit IP-based transport protocol draft to IESG for
publication as a Standards-track RFC
Done Submit initial adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as a
Proposed Standard
Done Submit protocol Applicability Statements draft to IESG for
consideration as an Informationl RFC
Done Submit protocol MIB draft to IESG for consideration as an
Proposed Standard
Done Submit security framework to IESG for consideration as Proposed
Standard
Done Resubmit updated IUA specification to IESG for consideration as
proposed standard
Done Submit remaining adaptation drafts to IESG for consideration as
a Proposed Standard
Mar 2004 Submit implementation guidelines and other extensions based on
testing to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
Internet-Drafts:
Posted Revised I-D Title <Filename>
------ ------- --------------------------------------------
Aug 2004 Feb 2006 <draft-ietf-sigtran-rfc3332bis-06.txt>
Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 3 (MTP3) - User
Adaptation Layer (M3UA)
Feb 2005 Mar 2006 <draft-ietf-sigtran-sua-implementor-guide-03.txt>
SUA Implementor's guide
Request For Comments:
RFC Stat Published Title
------- -- ----------- ------------------------------------
RFC2719 I Oct 1999 Architectural Framework for Signaling Transport
RFC2960 PS Nov 2000 Stream Control Transmission Protocol
RFC3057 PS Feb 2001 ISDN Q.921-User Adaptation Layer
RFC3257 I Apr 2002 Stream Control Transmission Protocol Applicability
Statement
RFC3331 PS Sep 2002 Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part (MTP)2 -
User Adaption Layer
RFC3332 PS Sep 2002 SS7 MTP3-User Adaptation Layer (M3UA)
RFC3807Standard Jun 2004 V5.2-User Adaption Layer (V5UA)
RFC3788Standard Jun 2004 Security Considerations for SIGTRAN Protocols
RFC3873Standard Sep 2004 Stream Control Transmission Protocol Management
Information Base
RFC3868Standard Oct 2004 Signalling Connection Control Part User Adaptation Layer
(SUA)
RFC4165Standard Sep 2005 Signaling System 7 (SS7) Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP2)
- User Peer-to-Peer Adaptation Layer (M2PA)
RFC4129Standard Oct 2005 Digital Private Network Signaling System (DPNSS)/Digital
Access Signaling System 2 (DASS 2) Extensions to the IUA
protocol
RFC4233Standard Jan 2006 Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) Q.921-User
Adaptation Layer
RFC4166 I Feb 2006 Telephony Signalling Transport over Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Applicability