rfc8855v7.txt		rfc8855.txt
	skipping to change at line 12 ¶		skipping to change at line 12 ¶
	Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) G. Camarillo		Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) G. Camarillo
	Request for Comments: 8855 Ericsson		Request for Comments: 8855 Ericsson
	Obsoletes: 4582 K. Drage		Obsoletes: 4582 K. Drage
	Category: Standards Track		Category: Standards Track
	ISSN: 2070-1721 T. Kristensen		ISSN: 2070-1721 T. Kristensen
	Jotron		Jotron
	J. Ott		J. Ott
	Technical University Munich		Technical University Munich
	C. Eckel		C. Eckel
	Cisco		Cisco
	April 2020		January 2021
	The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)		The Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP)
	Abstract		Abstract
	Floor control is a means to manage joint or exclusive access to		Floor control is a means to manage joint or exclusive access to
	shared resources in a (multiparty) conferencing environment.		shared resources in a (multiparty) conferencing environment.
	Thereby, floor control complements other functions -- such as		Thereby, floor control complements other functions -- such as
	conference and media session setup, conference policy manipulation,		conference and media session setup, conference policy manipulation,
	and media control -- that are realized by other protocols.		and media control -- that are realized by other protocols.
	skipping to change at line 47 ¶		skipping to change at line 47 ¶
	received public review and has been approved for publication by the		received public review and has been approved for publication by the
	Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on		Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
	Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.		Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
	Information about the current status of this document, any errata,		Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
	and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at		and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
	https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8855.		https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8855.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	skipping to change at line 803 ¶		skipping to change at line 803 ¶
	| 14 | FloorRequestStatusAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S |		| 14 | FloorRequestStatusAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S |
	+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+		+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+
	| 15 | FloorStatusAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S |		| 15 | FloorStatusAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S |
	+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+		+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+
	| 16 | Goodbye | P -> S ; Ch -> S ; |		| 16 | Goodbye | P -> S ; Ch -> S ; |
	| | | P <- S ; Ch <- S |		| | | P <- S ; Ch <- S |
	+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+		+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+
	| 17 | GoodbyeAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S ; |		| 17 | GoodbyeAck | P -> S ; Ch -> S ; |
	| | | P <- S ; Ch <- S |		| | | P <- S ; Ch <- S |
	+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+		+-------+-----------------------+--------------------+
	| S: Floor Control Server / P: Floor Participant / |		| S: Floor Control Server |
	| Ch: Floor Chair |		| P: Floor Participant |
			| Ch: Floor Chair |
	+----------------------------------------------------+		+----------------------------------------------------+
	Table 1: BFCP primitives		Table 1: BFCP primitives
	Payload Length: This 16-bit field contains the length of the message		Payload Length: This 16-bit field contains the length of the message
	in 4-octet units, excluding the COMMON-HEADER. If a floor control		in 4-octet units, excluding the COMMON-HEADER. If a floor control
	server receives a message with an incorrect Payload Length field		server receives a message with an incorrect Payload Length field
	value, the receiving server MUST send an Error message with		value, the receiving server MUST send an Error message with
	parameter value 13 (Incorrect Message Length) to indicate this and		parameter value 13 (Incorrect Message Length) to indicate this and
	then discard the message. Other entities that receive a message		then discard the message. Other entities that receive a message
	skipping to change at line 2036 ¶		skipping to change at line 2037 ¶
	deployment, this infrastructure typically includes some subset of		deployment, this infrastructure typically includes some subset of
	Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [16].		Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [16].
	In order to facilitate the initial establishment of NAT bindings, and		In order to facilitate the initial establishment of NAT bindings, and
	to maintain those bindings once established, BFCP entities using an		to maintain those bindings once established, BFCP entities using an
	unreliable transport are RECOMMENDED to use STUN [14] Binding		unreliable transport are RECOMMENDED to use STUN [14] Binding
	Indication for keepalives, as described for ICE [16]. Section 6.7 of		Indication for keepalives, as described for ICE [16]. Section 6.7 of
	[28] provides useful recommendations for middlebox interaction when		[28] provides useful recommendations for middlebox interaction when
	DTLS is used.		DTLS is used.
	| Informational note: Since the version number is set to 2 when		| Note: Since the version number is set to 2 when BFCP is used
	| BFCP is used over an unreliable transport, cf. the Ver field in		| over an unreliable transport, cf. the Ver field in Section 5.1,
	| Section 5.1, it is straightforward to distinguish between STUN		| it is straightforward to distinguish between STUN and BFCP
	| and BFCP packets even without checking the STUN magic cookie		| packets even without checking the STUN magic cookie [14].
	| [14].
	In order to facilitate traversal of BFCP packets through NATs, BFCP		In order to facilitate traversal of BFCP packets through NATs, BFCP
	entities using an unreliable transport are RECOMMENDED to use		entities using an unreliable transport are RECOMMENDED to use
	symmetric ports for sending and receiving BFCP packets, as		symmetric ports for sending and receiving BFCP packets, as
	recommended for RTP/RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) [13].		recommended for RTP/RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) [13].
	7. Lower-Layer Security		7. Lower-Layer Security
	BFCP relies on lower-layer security mechanisms to provide replay and		BFCP relies on lower-layer security mechanisms to provide replay and
	integrity protection and confidentiality. BFCP floor control servers		integrity protection and confidentiality. BFCP floor control servers
	skipping to change at line 3754 ¶		skipping to change at line 3754 ¶
	2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,		2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
	May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.		May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
	[11] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol		[11] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
	Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,		Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
	[12] Camarillo, G., Kristensen, T., and C. Holmberg, "Session		[12] Camarillo, G., Kristensen, T., and C. Holmberg, "Session
	Description Protocol (SDP) Format for Binary Floor Control		Description Protocol (SDP) Format for Binary Floor Control
	Protocol (BFCP) Streams", RFC 8856, DOI 10.17487/RFC8856,		Protocol (BFCP) Streams", RFC 8856, DOI 10.17487/RFC8856,
	April 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8856>.		January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8856>.
	[13] Wing, D., "Symmetric RTP / RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)",		[13] Wing, D., "Symmetric RTP / RTP Control Protocol (RTCP)",
	BCP 131, RFC 4961, DOI 10.17487/RFC4961, July 2007,		BCP 131, RFC 4961, DOI 10.17487/RFC4961, July 2007,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4961>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4961>.
	[14] Rosenberg, J., Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and D. Wing,		[14] Rosenberg, J., Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and D. Wing,
	"Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389,		"Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5389, October 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5389, October 2008,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5389>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5389>.
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	10 lines changed or deleted		10 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/