TOC |
|
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2009.
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document.
The "music on hold" feature is one of the most desired features of telephone systems in the business environment. "Music on hold" is where, when one party to a call has the call "on hold", that party's telephone provides an audio stream (often music) to be heard by the other party. Architectural features of SIP make it difficult to implement music-on-hold in a way that is fully compliant with the standards. The implementation of music-on-hold described in this document is fully effective and standards-compliant, but is simpler than the methods previously documented.
1.
Introduction
2.
Technique
2.1.
Placing a Call on Hold and Providing an External Media Stream
2.2.
Taking a Call off Hold and Terminating the External Media Stream
2.3.
Example Message Flow
2.4.
Re-INVITE and UPDATE from the Remote UA
2.5.
INVITE with Replaces
2.6.
Re-INVITE and UPDATE from the Music-On-Hold Source
2.7.
Payload Type Numbers
3.
Advantages
4.
The Importance of Offering All Available Media Formats
5.
Security Considerations
6.
Acknowledgments
7.
Revision History
7.1.
Changes from draft-worley-service-example-00 to draft-worley-service-example-01
7.2.
Changes from draft-worley-service-example-01 to draft-worley-service-example-02
7.3.
Changes from draft-worley-service-example-02 to draft-worley-service-example-03
8.
References
8.1.
Normative References
8.2.
Informative References
§
Author's Address
TOC |
Within SIP[sip] (Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, “SIP: Session Initiation Protocol,” June 2002.)-based systems, it is desirable to be able to provide features that are similar to those provided by traditional telephony systems. A frequently requested feature is "music on hold": The music-on-hold feature is where, when one party to a call has the call "on hold", that party's telephone provides an audio stream (often music) to be heard by the other party.
Architectural features of SIP make it difficult to implement music-on-hold in a way that is fully compliant with the standards. The purpose of this document is to describe a method that is reasonably simple yet fully effective and standards-compliant.
TOC |
The essence of the technique is that when the executing UA (the user's UA) performs a re-INVITE of the remote UA to establish the hold state, it provides no SDP[sdp] (Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, “SDP: Session Description Protocol,” July 2006.) offer[offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.)[offer‑answer‑bis] (Sawada, T. and P. Kyzivat, “SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Usage of the Offer/Answer Model,” January 2009.), thus compelling the remote UA to provide an SDP offer. The executing UA then extracts the offer SDP from the remote UA's 2xx response, and uses that as the offer SDP in a new INVITE to the external media source. The external media source is thus directed to provide media directly to the remote UA. The media source's answer SDP is returned to the remote UA in the ACK to the re-INVITE.
TOC |
TOC |
TOC |
This section shows a message flow which is an example of this technique. The scenario is: Alice establishes a call with Bob. Bob then places the call on hold, with music-on-hold provided from an external source. Bob then takes the call off hold.
Note that this is just one possible message flow that illustrates this technique; numerous variations on these operations are allowed by the applicable standards.
Alice Bob Music Source Alice establishes the call: | | | | INVITE F1 | | |--------------->| | | 180 Ringing F2 | | |<---------------| | | 200 OK F3 | | |<---------------| | | ACK F4 | | |--------------->| | | RTP | | |<==============>| | | | | Bob places Alice on hold, compelling Alice's UA to provide SDP: | | | | INVITE F5 | | | (no SDP) | | |<---------------| | | 200 OK F6 | | | (SDP offer) | | |--------------->| | | | | Bob's UA initiates music-on-hold: | | | | | INVITE F7 | | | (SDP offer, | | | rev. hold) | | |------------->| | | 200 OK F8 | | | (SDP answer, | | | hold) | | |<-------------| | | ACK F9 | | |------------->| | | | Bob's UA provides an SDP answer containing the address/port of the Music Source: | | | | ACK F10 | | | (SDP answer, | | | hold | | |<---------------| | | no RTP | | | | | | Music-on-hold RTP | |<==============================| | | | The music on hold is active. Bob takes Alice off hold: | | | | INVITE F11 | | | (SDP offer) | | |<---------------| | | 200 OK F12 | | | (SDP answer) | | |--------------->| | | ACK F13 | | |<---------------| | | | BYE F14 | | |------------->| | | 200 F15 | | |<-------------| | RTP | | |<==============>| | | | | The normal media session between Alice and Bob is resumed.
/* Alice calls Bob. */ F1 INVITE Alice -> Bob INVITE sips:bob@biloxi.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bf9 Max-Forwards: 70 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 F2 180 Ringing Bob -> Alice SIP/2.0 180 Ringing Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bf9 ;received=192.0.2.103 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Content-Length: 0 F3 200 OK Bob -> Alice SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bf9 ;received=192.0.2.103 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844527 2890844527 IN IP4 biloxi.example.com s= c=IN IP4 biloxi.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 F4 ACK Alice -> Bob ACK sips:bob@biloxi.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bfd Max-Forwards: 70 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 ACK Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Length: 0 /* Bob places Alice on hold. */ /* The re-INVITE contains no SDP, thus compelling Alice's UA to provide an offer. */ F5 INVITE Bob -> Alice INVITE sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK874bk To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 712 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;+sip.rendering="no" Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Length: 0 /* Alice's UA provides an SDP offer. Since it does not know that it is being put on hold, the offer is the same as the original offer and describes bidirectional media. */ F6 200 OK Alice -> Bob SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK874bk ;received=192.0.2.105 To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 712 INVITE Contact: <sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=active /* Bob's UA initiates music-on-hold. */ /* This INVITE contains Alice's offer, but with the media direction set to "reverse hold", receive-only. */ F7 INVITE Bob -> Music Source INVITE sips:music@source.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 Max-Forwards: 70 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com> Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844534 2890844534 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=recvonly F8 200 OK Music Source -> Bob SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 ;received=192.0.2.105 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com>;tag=56323 Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com Contact: <sips:music@source.example.com> CSeq: 1 INVITE Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=MusicSource 2890844576 2890844576 IN IP4 source.example.com s= c=IN IP4 source.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=sendonly F9 ACK Bob -> Music Source ACK sips:music@source.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS source.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bT6 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com>;tag=56323 Max-Forwards: 70 Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com CSeq: 1 ACK Content-Length: 0 /* Bob's UA now sends the ACK that completes the re-INVITE to Alice and completes the SDP offer/answer. The ACK contains the SDP received from the Music Source, and thus contains the address/port from which the Music Source will send media. */ F10 ACK Bob -> Alice ACK sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKq874b To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 712 ACK Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;+sip.rendering="no" Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844527 2890844528 IN IP4 biloxi.example.com s= c=IN IP4 source.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=sendonly /* Bob picks up the call by sending a re-INVITE to Alice. */ F11 INVITE Bob -> Alice INVITE sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK874bk To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 713 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844527 2890844529 IN IP4 biloxi.example.com s= c=IN IP4 biloxi.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 F12 200 OK Alice -> Bob SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK874bk ;received=192.0.2.105 To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 713 INVITE Contact: <sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 F13 ACK Bob -> Alice ACK sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKq874b To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 713 ACK Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Length: 0 F14 BYE Bob -> Music Source BYE sips:music@source.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74rf Max-Forwards: 70 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com>;tag=56323 Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com CSeq: 2 BYE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Length: [omitted] F15 200 OK Music Source -> Alice SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74rf ;received=192.0.2.103 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com>;tag=56323 Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com CSeq: 2 BYE Content-Length: 0 /* Normal media session between Alice and Bob is resumed */
TOC |
While the call is on-hold, the remote UA can send a request to modify the SDP or the feature parameters of its Contact header. This can be done with either an INVITE or UPDATE method, both of which have much the same effect in regard to MOH.
A common reason for a re-INVITE will be when the remote UA desires to put the dialog on hold on its end. And because of the need to support this case, an implementation must process INVITEs and UPDATEs during the on-hold state as described below.
The executing UA handles these requests by echoing requests and responses: an incoming request from the remote UA causes the executing UA to send a similar request to the MOH source and an incoming response from the MOH source causes the executing UA to send a similar response to the remote UA. In all cases, SDP offers or answers that are received are added as bodies to the stimulated request or response to the other UA.
The passed-through SDP will usually need its o= line modified. The directionality attributes may need to be restricted. In regard to payload type numbers, since the mapping has already been established within the MOH dialog, a=rtpmap lines need not be added.
TOC |
The executing UA must be prepared to receive INVITE requests with a Replaces headers that replaces the original dialog, and similarly it must be prepared to receive REFER requests within the dialog. The SDP within the new dialog is negotiated by being passed through to the MOH source within a new dialog with the MOH source. The SDP offer or answer can be passed to the MOH source with only modification to the o= line and directionality attributes.
In some cases, the previous dialog with the MOH source can be reused, but only if the executing UA presents the first offer within the new dialog, as otherwise there is no way to force the RTP payload types that have been used previously in the MOH dialog to be mapped to the correct codecs in the new dialog.
TOC |
It is possible for the MOH source to send an INVITE or UPDATE request, and the executing UA can support doing so in similar manner as requests from the remote UA. However, if the MOH source is within the same administrative domain as the executing UA, the executing UA may have knowledge that the MOH source will not (or need not) make such requests, and so can respond to any such request with a failure response, avoiding the need to pass the request through.
However, in an environment in which ICE[ice] (Rosenberg, J., “Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT) Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols,” October 2007.) is supported, the MOH source may need to send requests as part of ICE negotiation[elwell] (Elwell, J., “Subject: [Sipping] RE: I-D Action:draft-worley-service-example-00.txt,” November 2007.) with the remote UA. Hence, in environments that support ICE, the executing UA must be able to pass through requests from the MOH source as well as requests from the remote UA.
Again, as SDP is passed through, its o= line will need to be modified. In some cases, the directionality attributes will need to be restricted.
TOC |
In this technique, the MOH source generates an SDP answer that the executing UA presents to the remote UA as an answer within the original dialog. In basic functionality, this presents no problem, because [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.) (section 6.1, at the very end) specifies that the payload type numbers used in either direction of RTP are the ones specified in the SDP sent by the recipient of the RTP.
But strict compliance to [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.) (section 8.3.2) requires that payload type numbers used in SDP may only duplicate the payload type numbers used in any SDP used in the same direction in the dialog if the payload type numbers represent the same media format (codec) as they did previously. However, the MOH source has no knowledge of the payload type numbers previously used in the original dialog, and it may accidentally specify a media format for a previously used payload type number in its answer (or in a subsequently generated INVITE or UPDATE). This would cause no problem with media decoding, as it cannot send any format that was not in the remote UA's offer, but it would violate [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.).
Strictly speaking, it is impossible to avoid this problem because the generator of a first answer in its dialog can choose the payload numbers independently of the payload numbers in the offer, and the MOH server believes that its answer is first in the dialog. Thus the only absolute solution is to have the executing UA rewrite the SDP that passes through it to reassign payload type numbers, which would also require it to rewrite the payload type numbers in the RTP packets -- a very undesirable solution. But we can exploit a SHOULD-level requirement in [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.) (section 6.1): "In the case of RTP, if a particular codec was referenced with a specific payload type number in the offer, that same payload type number SHOULD be used for that codec in the answer." If the MOH source obeys this restriction, the executing UA can modify the offer SDP to "reserve" all payload type numbers that have ever been offered by the executing UA to prevent the MOH source from using them for different media formats.
When the executing UA is composing the INVITE to the MOH source, it compiles a list of all the (dynamically-assigned) payload type numbers which have been used by it (or by MOH sources on its behalf) in the original dialog but which are not mapped to a media format in the current offer SDP. (The executing UA must be maintaining a list of all previously used payload type numbers anyway, in order to comply with [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.).) Then, for each of these payload type numbers, it inserts session-level or media-level (as appropriate) a=rtpmap lines specifying the payload type number and the media format that it has been used for. Because of the reuse rule, the MOH source SHOULD not propose those payload type numbers for any other media format.
Note that any re-INVITEs from the remote UA that the executing UA passes through to the MOH server require similar modification, as payload type numbers that the MOH server receives in past offers are not absolutely reserved against its use (as they have not been sent in SDP by the MOH server) nor is there a SHOULD-level proscription against using them in the current answer (as they do not appear in the current offer).
This should provide an adequate solution to the problems with payload type numbers, as it will fail only if (1) the remote UA is particular that other UAs follow the rule about not re-defining payload type numbers, and (2) the MOH server does not follow the SHOULD-level requirement of [offer‑answer] (Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” June 2002.) section 6.1.
Let us show how this process works by modifying the example Section 2.3 (Example Message Flow) with this specific assignment of supported codecs:
Alice supports formats X and Y
Bob supports formats X and Z
Music Source supports formats Y and Z
In this case, the SDP exchanges are:
F1 offers X and Y, F3 answers X and Z (which cannot be used)
F6 offers X and Y, but F7 offers X, Y, and a place-holder to block type 92
F8/F10 answers Y
F1 INVITE Alice -> Bob INVITE sips:bob@biloxi.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bf9 Max-Forwards: 70 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 90 91 a=rtpmap:90 X/8000 a=rtpmap:91 Y/8000 F3 200 OK Bob -> Alice SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS atlanta.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK74bf9 ;received=192.0.2.103 From: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 To: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844527 2890844527 IN IP4 biloxi.example.com s= c=IN IP4 biloxi.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 3456 RTP/AVP 90 92 a=rtpmap:90 X/8000 a=rtpmap:92 Z/8000 F6 200 OK Alice -> Bob SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bK874bk ;received=192.0.2.105 To: Alice <sips:alice@atlanta.example.com>;tag=1234567 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=23431 Call-ID: 12345600@atlanta.example.com CSeq: 712 INVITE Contact: <sips:a8342043f@atlanta.example.com;gr> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=alice 2890844526 2890844526 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 90 91 a=rtpmap:90 X/8000 a=rtpmap:91 Y/8000 F7 INVITE Bob -> Music Source INVITE sips:music@source.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 Max-Forwards: 70 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com> Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com> Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY Supported: replaces, gruu Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=bob 2890844534 2890844534 IN IP4 atlanta.example.com s= c=IN IP4 atlanta.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 90 91 92 a=rtpmap:90 X/8000 a=rtpmap:91 Y/8000 a=rtpmap:92 x-reserved/8000 a=recvonly F8 200 OK Music Source -> Bob SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TLS biloxi.example.com:5061 ;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 ;received=192.0.2.105 From: Bob <sips:bob@biloxi.example.com>;tag=02134 To: Music Source <sips:music@source.example.com>;tag=56323 Call-ID: 4802029847@biloxi.example.com Contact: <sips:music@source.example.com> CSeq: 1 INVITE Content-Length: [omitted] v=0 o=MusicSource 2890844576 2890844576 IN IP4 source.example.com s= c=IN IP4 source.example.com t=0 0 m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 91 a=rtpmap:91 Y/8000 a=sendonly
TOC |
This technique for providing music-on-hold has advantages over other methods now in use:
TOC |
Failures can happen if SDP offerers do not always offer all media formats that they support. Doing so is considered best practice, but some elements will offer only formats that have already been in use in the dialog.
An example of how omitting media formats in an offer can lead to failure is as follows: Suppose that the UAs inSection 2.3 (Example Message Flow) each support the following media formats:
Alice supports formats X and Y
Bob supports formats X and Z
Music Source supports formats Y and Z
In this case, the SDP exchanges are:
F1 offers X and Y, F3 answers X
F6/F7 offers X and Y, F8/F10 answers Y
F11 offers X and Z, F12 answers X
Note that in exchange 2, if Alice assumes that because only format X is in use that she should offer only X, the exchange fails. In exchange 3, Bob offers formats X and Z, even though neither is in use at the time (because Bob is not involved in the media streams).
TOC |
Some UAs filter incoming media based on the address of origin in order to avoid SPIT. The technique described in this document ensures that any UA that should render MOH media will be informed of the source address of the media via the SDP that it receives. This should allow such UAs to filter without interfering with MOH operation.
TOC |
The original version of this proposal was derived from [service‑examples‑11] (Johnston, A., Sparks, R., Cunningham, C., Donovan, S., and K. Summers, “Session Initiation Protocol Service Examples,” October 2006.) and the similar implementation of MOH in the Snom UA. Significant improvements to the sequence of operations, allowing improvements to the SDP handling, were suggested by Venkatesh[venkatesh] (Venkatesh, “Subject: Re: [Sipping] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sipping-service-examples-11.txt,” October 2006.).
John Elwell[elwell] (Elwell, J., “Subject: [Sipping] RE: I-D Action:draft-worley-service-example-00.txt,” November 2007.) pointed out the need for the executing UA to pass through re-INVITEs/UPDATEs in order to allow ICE negotiation.
Paul Kyzivat[kyzivat] (Kyzivat, P., “Subject: Re: [Sipping] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sipping-service-examples-11.txt,” October 2006.) pointed out the difficulties regarding re-use of payload type numbers.
Paul Kyzivat suggested adding sectionSection 4 (The Importance of Offering All Available Media Formats) showing why offerers should always include all supported formats.
TOC |
TOC |
Removed the original "Example Message Flow" and promoted the "Alternative Example Message Flow" to replace it because of a number of flaws that were found during the discussion of -00 on the SIPPING mailing list.
Described the use of the sip.rendering feature parameter to indicate on-hold status.
TOC |
Added discussion of passing though re-INVITEs and UPDATEs.
Added discussion of payload type numbers.
Added Acknowledgments section.
TOC |
Added sectionSection 4 (The Importance of Offering All Available Media Formats) showing the importance of the offerer always including all supported media formats.
Updated references.
Revised handling of payload type numbers when passing offer to MOH serverSection 2.7 (Payload Type Numbers) based on observations by Paul Kyzivat.
TOC |
TOC |
[sip] | 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 (TXT). |
[offer-answer] | Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, “An Offer/Answer Model with the Session Description Protocol (SDP),” RFC 3264, June 2002 (TXT). |
[sdp] | Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, “SDP: Session Description Protocol,” RFC 4566, July 2006 (TXT). |
TOC |
TOC |
Dale R. Worley | |
Nortel Networks Corp. | |
600 Technology Park Dr. | |
Billerica, MA 01821 | |
US | |
Email: | dworley@nortel.com |
URI: | http://www.nortel.com |