[rfc-dist] RFC 8688 on A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Response Code for Rejected Calls
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Thu, 05 December 2019 05:24 UTC
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02211200C3 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 21:24:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GjzBbI3zeC88 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 21:24:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17ABD12095A for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 21:24:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0AB6F4071B; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 21:24:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 83D8CF40724; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 21:24:31 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20191205052431.83D8CF40724@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 21:24:31 -0800
Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 8688 on A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Response Code for Rejected Calls
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, sipcore@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-dist <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 8688
Title: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Response Code for Rejected Calls
Author: E.W. Burger, B. Nagda
Status: Standards Track
Stream: IETF
Date: December 2019
Mailbox: eburger@standardstrack.com,
nagdab@gmail.com
Pages: 22
Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None
I-D Tag: draft-ietf-sipcore-rejected-09.txt
URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8688
DOI: 10.17487/RFC8688
This document defines the 608 (Rejected) Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) response code. This response code enables calling parties to
learn that an intermediary rejected their call attempt. No one will
deliver, and thus answer, the call. As a 6xx code, the caller will be
aware that future attempts to contact the same User Agent Server will
likely fail. The initial use case driving the need for the 608
response code is when the intermediary is an analytics engine. In
this case, the rejection is by a machine or other process. This
contrasts with the 607 (Unwanted) SIP response code in which a human
at the target User Agent Server indicates the user did not want the
call. In some jurisdictions, this distinction is important. This
document also defines the use of the Call-Info header field in 608
responses to enable rejected callers to contact entities that blocked
their calls in error. This provides a remediation mechanism for legal
callers that find their calls blocked.
This document is a product of the Session Initiation Protocol Core Working Group of the IETF.
This is now a Proposed Standard.
STANDARDS TRACK: 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 Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the
standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk
Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.
The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC
_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org