GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc8841



Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) C. Holmberg Request for Comments: 8841 Ericsson Category: Standards Track R. Shpount ISSN: 2070-1721 TurboBridge

                                                             S. Loreto
                                                          G. Camarillo
                                                              Ericsson
                                                          January 2021

Session Description Protocol (SDP) Offer/Answer Procedures for Stream

 Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) over Datagram Transport Layer
                     Security (DTLS) Transport

Abstract

 The Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) is a transport
 protocol used to establish associations between two endpoints.  RFC
 8261 specifies how SCTP can be used on top of the Datagram Transport
 Layer Security (DTLS) protocol, which is referred to as SCTP-over-
 DTLS.
 This specification defines the following new Session Description
 Protocol (SDP) protocol identifiers (proto values): "UDP/DTLS/SCTP"
 and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP".  This specification also specifies how to use
 the new proto values with the SDP offer/answer mechanism for
 negotiating SCTP-over-DTLS associations.

Status of This Memo

 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
 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).  Further information on
 Internet Standards is available in 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/rfc8841.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2021 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.

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction
 2.  Conventions
 3.  SCTP Terminology
 4.  SDP Media Descriptions
   4.1.  General
   4.2.  Protocol Identifiers
   4.3.  Media-Format Management
   4.4.  Syntax
     4.4.1.  General
     4.4.2.  SDP Media Description Values
   4.5.  Example
 5.  SDP "sctp-port" Attribute
   5.1.  General
   5.2.  Syntax
   5.3.  Mux Category
 6.  SDP "max-message-size" Attribute
   6.1.  General
   6.2.  Syntax
   6.3.  Mux Category
 7.  UDP/DTLS/SCTP Transport Realization
 8.  TCP/DTLS/SCTP Transport Realization
 9.  Association and Connection Management
   9.1.  General
   9.2.  SDP "sendrecv"/"sendonly"/"recvonly"/"inactive" Attributes
   9.3.  SCTP Association
   9.4.  DTLS Association (UDP/DTLS/SCTP and TCP/DTLS/SCTP)
   9.5.  TCP Connection (TCP/DTLS/SCTP)
 10. SDP Offer/Answer Procedures
   10.1.  General
   10.2.  Generating the Initial SDP Offer
   10.3.  Generating the SDP Answer
   10.4.  Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer
   10.5.  Modifying the Session
 11. Multihoming Considerations
 12. NAT Considerations
   12.1.  General
   12.2.  ICE Considerations
 13. Examples
   13.1.  Establishment of UDP/DTLS/SCTP Association
 14. Security Considerations
 15. IANA Considerations
   15.1.  New SDP Proto Values
   15.2.  New SDP Attributes
     15.2.1.  sctp-port
     15.2.2.  max-message-size
   15.3.  association-usage Name Registry
 16. References
   16.1.  Normative References
   16.2.  Informative References
 Acknowledgements
 Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

 The Session Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566] provides a general-
 purpose format for describing multimedia sessions in announcements or
 invitations.  "TCP-Based Media Transport in the Session Description
 Protocol (SDP)" [RFC4145] specifies a general mechanism for
 describing and establishing TCP [RFC0793] streams.  "Connection-
 Oriented Media Transport over the Transport Layer Security (TLS)
 Protocol in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)" [RFC8122] extends
 [RFC4145] to describe TCP-based media streams that are protected
 using TLS.
 The Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) [RFC4960] is a
 reliable transport protocol used to transport data between two
 endpoints using SCTP associations.
 [RFC8261] specifies how SCTP can be used on top of the Datagram
 Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol, an arrangement referred to
 as SCTP-over-DTLS.
 This specification defines the following new SDP [RFC4566] protocol
 identifiers (proto values): "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP".
 This document also specifies how to use the new proto values with the
 SDP offer/answer mechanism [RFC3264] for negotiating SCTP-over-DTLS
 associations.
    |  NOTE: Due to the characteristics of TCP, while multiple SCTP
    |  streams can still be used, usage of "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" will always
    |  force ordered and reliable delivery of the SCTP packets, which
    |  limits the usage of the SCTP options.  Therefore, it is
    |  RECOMMENDED that TCP is only used in situations where UDP
    |  traffic is blocked.

2. Conventions

 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.

3. SCTP Terminology

 SCTP association:  A protocol relationship between SCTP endpoints,
    composed of the two SCTP endpoints and protocol state information
    including verification tags and the currently active set of
    Transmission Sequence Numbers (TSNs), etc.  An association can be
    uniquely identified by the transport addresses used by the
    endpoints in the association.
 SCTP stream:  A unidirectional logical channel established from one
    associated SCTP endpoint to another, within which all user
    messages are delivered in sequence except for those submitted to
    the unordered delivery service.
 SCTP-over-DTLS:  SCTP used on top of DTLS, as specified in [RFC8261].

4. SDP Media Descriptions

4.1. General

 This section defines the following new SDP media description ("m="
 line) protocol identifiers (proto values) for describing an SCTP
 association: "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP".  The section also
 describes how an "m=" line associated with the proto values is
 created.
 The following is the format for an "m=" line, as specified in
 [RFC4566]:
 m=<media> <port> <proto> <fmt> ...
 The "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto values are similar to
 both the "UDP" and "TCP" proto values in that they only describe the
 transport-layer protocol and not the upper-layer protocol.
    |  NOTE: When the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto values
    |  are used, the underlying transport protocol is, respectively,
    |  UDP and TCP; SCTP is carried on top of DTLS, which is on top of
    |  those transport-layer protocols.

4.2. Protocol Identifiers

 The new proto values are defined as below:
  • The "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value describes an SCTP association on

top of a DTLS association on top of UDP, as defined in Section 7.

  • The "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value describes an SCTP association on

top of a DTLS association on top of TCP, as defined in Section 8.

4.3. Media-Format Management

 [RFC4566] states that specifications defining new proto values must
 define the rules by which their media format (fmt) namespace is
 managed.
 An "m=" line with a proto value of "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" or "TCP/DTLS/SCTP"
 always describes a single SCTP association.
 In addition, such an "m=" line MUST further indicate the application-
 layer protocol using an "fmt" identifier.  There MUST be exactly one
 fmt value per "m=" line associated with the proto values defined in
 this specification.  The "fmt" namespace associated with those proto
 values describes the generic application usage of the entire SCTP
 association, including the associated SCTP streams.
 When the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto values are used,
 the "m=" line fmt value, which identifies the application-layer
 protocol, MUST be registered by IANA.  Section 15.3 defines the IANA
 registry for the media-format namespace.
    |  NOTE: A mechanism for how to describe and manage individual
    |  SCTP streams within an SCTP association is outside the scope of
    |  this specification.  [RFC8864] defines a mechanism for
    |  negotiating individual SCTP streams used to realize WebRTC data
    |  channels [RFC8831].

4.4. Syntax

4.4.1. General

 This section defines the values that can be used within an SDP media
 description ("m=" line) associated with an SCTP-over-DTLS
 association.
 This specification creates an IANA registry for "association-usage"
 values.

4.4.2. SDP Media Description Values

 When the SCTP association is used to realize a WebRTC data channel
 [RFC8832], the <fmt> parameter value is 'webrtc-datachannel'.
   +===========+===================================================+
   | "m=" line | parameter value(s)                                |
   | parameter |                                                   |
   +===========+===================================================+
   | <media>   | "application"                                     |
   +-----------+---------------------------------------------------+
   | <proto>   | "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" or "TCP/DTLS/SCTP"                |
   +-----------+---------------------------------------------------+
   | <port>    | UDP port number (for "UDP/DTLS/SCTP")             |
   |           | TCP port number (for "TCP/DTLS/SCTP")             |
   +-----------+---------------------------------------------------+
   | <fmt>     | A string denoting the association-usage, limited  |
   |           | to the syntax of a "token" as defined in RFC 4566 |
   +-----------+---------------------------------------------------+
                 Table 1: SDP Media Description Values

4.5. Example

  m=application 12345 UDP/DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel
  a=sctp-port:5000
  a=max-message-size:100000
    |  NOTE: "webrtc-datachannel" indicates the WebRTC Data Channel
    |  Establishment Protocol defined in [RFC8832].

5. SDP "sctp-port" Attribute

5.1. General

 This section defines a new SDP media-level attribute, "sctp-port".
 The attribute can be associated with an SDP media description ("m="
 line) with a "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" or a "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value.  In
 that case, the "m=" line port value indicates the port of the
 underlying transport-layer protocol (UDP or TCP), and the "sctp-port"
 value indicates the SCTP port.
 No default value is defined for the SDP "sctp-port" attribute.
 Therefore, if the attribute is not present, the associated "m=" line
 MUST be considered invalid.
    |  NOTE: This specification only defines the usage of the SDP
    |  "sctp-port" attribute when associated with an "m=" line
    |  containing one of the following proto values: "UDP/DTLS/SCTP"
    |  or "TCP/DTLS/SCTP".  Usage of the attribute with other proto
    |  values needs to be defined in a separate specification.

5.2. Syntax

 The definition of the SDP "sctp-port" attribute is:
 Attribute name:  sctp-port
 Type of attribute:  media
 Mux category:  CAUTION
 Subject to charset:  No
 Purpose:  Indicate the SCTP port value associated with the SDP media
    description.
 Appropriate values:  Integer
 Contact name:  Christer Holmberg
 Contact e-mail:  christer.holmberg@ericsson.com
 Reference:  RFC 8841
 Syntax:
    sctp-port-value = 1*5(DIGIT) ; DIGIT defined in RFC 4566
 The SCTP port range is between 0 and 65535 (both included).  Leading
 zeroes MUST NOT be used.
 Example:
    a=sctp-port:5000

5.3. Mux Category

 The mux category [RFC8859] for the SDP "sctp-port" attribute is
 CAUTION.
 As the usage of multiple SCTP associations on top of a single DTLS
 association is outside the scope of this specification, no mux rules
 are specified for the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto
 values.  Future extensions that define how to negotiate multiplexing
 of multiple SCTP associations of top of a single DTLS association
 need to also define the mux rules for the attribute.

6. SDP "max-message-size" Attribute

6.1. General

 This section defines a new SDP media-level attribute, "max-message-
 size".  The attribute can be associated with an "m=" line to indicate
 the maximum SCTP user message size (indicated in bytes) that an SCTP
 endpoint is willing to receive on the SCTP association associated
 with the "m=" line.  Different attribute values can be used in each
 direction.
 An SCTP endpoint MUST NOT send a SCTP user message with a message
 size that is larger than the maximum size indicated by the peer, as
 it cannot be assumed that the peer would accept such a message.
 If the SDP "max-message-size" attribute contains a maximum message
 size value of zero, it indicates that the SCTP endpoint will handle
 messages of any size, subject to memory capacity, etc.
 If the SDP "max-message-size" attribute is not present, the default
 value is 64K.
    |  NOTE: This specification only defines the usage of the SDP
    |  "max-message-size" attribute when associated with an "m=" line
    |  containing one of the following proto values: "UDP/DTLS/SCTP"
    |  or "TCP/DTLS/SCTP".  Usage of the attribute with other proto
    |  values needs to be defined in a separate specification.

6.2. Syntax

 The definition of the SDP "max-message-size" attribute is:
 Attribute name:  max-message-size
 Type of attribute:  media
 Mux category:  CAUTION
 Subject to charset:  No
 Purpose:  Indicate the maximum message size (indicated in bytes) that
    an SCTP endpoint is willing to receive on the SCTP association
    associated with the SDP media description.
 Appropriate values:  Integer
 Contact name:  Christer Holmberg
 Contact e-mail:  christer.holmberg@ericsson.com
 Reference:  RFC 8841
 Syntax:
    max-message-size-value = 1*DIGIT ; DIGIT defined in RFC 4566
 Leading zeroes MUST NOT be used.
 Example:
    a=max-message-size:100000

6.3. Mux Category

 The mux category for the SDP "max-message-size" attribute is CAUTION.
 As the usage of multiple SCTP associations on top of a single DTLS
 association is outside the scope of this specification, no mux rules
 are specified for the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto
 values.

7. UDP/DTLS/SCTP Transport Realization

 The UDP/DTLS/SCTP transport is realized as described below:
  • SCTP on top of DTLS is realized according to the procedures

defined in [RFC8261]; and

  • DTLS on top of UDP is realized according to the procedures in

defined in [RFC6347].

    |  NOTE: While [RFC8261] allows multiple SCTP associations on top
    |  of a single DTLS association, the procedures in this
    |  specification only support the negotiation of a single SCTP
    |  association on top of any given DTLS association.

8. TCP/DTLS/SCTP Transport Realization

 The TCP/DTLS/SCTP transport is realized as described below:
  • SCTP on top of DTLS is realized according to the procedures

defined in [RFC8261]; and

  • DTLS on top of TCP is realized using the framing method defined in

[RFC4571], with DTLS packets being sent and received instead of

    RTP/RTCP packets using the shim defined in [RFC4571].  The length
    field defined in [RFC4571] precedes each DTLS message, and SDP
    signaling is done according to the procedures defined in this
    specification.
    |  NOTE: TLS on top of TCP, without using the framing method
    |  defined in [RFC4571], is outside the scope of this
    |  specification.  A separate proto value would need to be
    |  registered for such transport realization.

9. Association and Connection Management

9.1. General

 This section describes how to manage an SCTP association, DTLS
 association, and TCP connection using SDP attributes.
 The SCTP association, the DTLS association, and the TCP connection
 are managed independently from each other.  Each can be established
 and closed without impacting others.
 The detailed SDP offer/answer [RFC3264] procedures for the SDP
 attributes are described in Section 10.

9.2. SDP "sendrecv"/"sendonly"/"recvonly"/"inactive" Attributes

 This specification does not define semantics for the SDP direction
 attributes [RFC4566].  Unless the semantics of these attributes for
 an SCTP association usage have been defined, SDP direction attributes
 MUST be ignored if present.

9.3. SCTP Association

 When an SCTP association is established, both SCTP endpoints MUST
 initiate the SCTP association (i.e., both SCTP endpoints take the
 "active" role).  In addition, both endpoints MUST use the same SCTP
 port as client port and server port, in order to prevent two separate
 SCTP associations from being established.
 As both SCTP endpoints take the "active" role, the SDP "setup"
 attribute [RFC4145] does not apply to SCTP association establishment.
 However, the "setup" attribute does apply to establishment of the
 underlying DTLS association and TCP connection.
    |  NOTE: The procedure above is different from TCP, where one
    |  endpoint takes the "active" role, the other endpoint takes the
    |  "passive" role, and only the "active" endpoint initiates the
    |  TCP connection [RFC4145].
    |  NOTE: When the SCTP association is established, it is assumed
    |  that any NAT traversal procedures for the underlying transport
    |  protocol (UDP or TCP) have successfully been performed.
 The SDP "connection" attribute [RFC4145] does not apply to the SCTP
 association.  In order to trigger the closure of an existing SCTP
 association and establishment of a new SCTP association, the SDP
 "sctp-port" attribute (Section 5) is used to indicate a new
 (different than the ones currently used) SCTP port.  The existing
 SCTP association is closed, and the new SCTP association is
 established, if one or both endpoints signal a new SCTP port.  The
 "connection" attribute does apply to establishment of underlying TCP
 connections.
 Alternatively, an SCTP association can be closed using the SDP "sctp-
 port" attribute with an attribute value of zero.  Later, a new SCTP
 association can be established using the procedures in this section
 for establishing an SCTP association.
 SCTP associations might be closed without SDP signaling -- for
 example, in case of a failure.  The procedures in this section MUST
 be followed to establish a new SCTP association.  This requires a new
 SDP offer/answer exchange.  New (different than the ones currently
 used) SCTP ports MUST be used by both endpoints.
    |  NOTE: Closing and establishing a new SCTP association using the
    |  SDP "sctp-port" attribute will not affect the state of the
    |  underlying DTLS association.

9.4. DTLS Association (UDP/DTLS/SCTP and TCP/DTLS/SCTP)

 A DTLS association is managed according to the procedures in
 [RFC8842].  Hence, the SDP "setup" attribute is used to negotiate the
 (D)TLS roles ("client" and "server") [RFC8122].
    |  NOTE: The SDP "setup" attribute is used to negotiate both the
    |  DTLS roles and the TCP roles (Section 9.5).
    |  NOTE: As described in [RFC8445], if the Interactive
    |  Connectivity Establishment (ICE) mechanism [RFC8445] is used,
    |  all ICE candidates associated with a DTLS association are
    |  considered part of the same DTLS association.  Thus, a switch
    |  from one candidate pair to another candidate pair will not
    |  trigger the establishment of a new DTLS association.

9.5. TCP Connection (TCP/DTLS/SCTP)

 The TCP connection is managed according to the procedures in
 [RFC4145].  Hence, the SDP "setup" attribute is used to negotiate the
 TCP roles ("active" and "passive"), and the SDP "connection"
 attribute is used to indicate whether to use an existing TCP
 connection or create a new one.  The SDP "setup" attribute "holdconn"
 value MUST NOT be used.
    |  NOTE: A change of the TCP roles will also trigger a closure of
    |  the DTLS association and establishment of a new DTLS
    |  association, according to the procedures in [RFC8842].
    |  NOTE: As specified in [RFC8842], usage of the SDP "setup"
    |  attribute "holdconn" value is not allowed.  Therefore, this
    |  specification also forbids usage of the attribute value for
    |  TCP, as DTLS is transported on top of TCP.

10. SDP Offer/Answer Procedures

10.1. General

 This section defines the SDP Offer/Answer [RFC3264] procedures for
 negotiating and establishing an SCTP-over-DTLS association.  Unless
 explicitly stated, the procedures apply to both the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP"
 and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" "m=" line proto values.
 Each endpoint MUST associate one or more certificate fingerprints
 using the SDP "fingerprint" attribute with the "m=" line, following
 the procedures in [RFC8122].
 The authentication certificates are interpreted and validated as
 defined in [RFC8122].  Self-signed certificates can be used securely,
 provided that the integrity of the SDP description is assured, as
 defined in [RFC8122].
 Each endpoint MUST associate an SDP "tls-id" attribute with the "m="
 line, following the procedures in [RFC8842].

10.2. Generating the Initial SDP Offer

 When the offerer creates an initial offer, the offerer:
  • MUST associate an SDP "setup" attribute with the "m=" line;
  • MUST associate an SDP "sctp-port" attribute with the "m=" line;
  • MUST, in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP, associate an SDP "connection"

attribute, with a "new" attribute value, with the "m=" line; and

  • MAY associate an SDP "max-message-size" attribute (Section 6) with

the "m=" line.

10.3. Generating the SDP Answer

 When the answerer receives an offer that contains an "m=" line
 describing an SCTP-over-DTLS association, if the answerer accepts the
 association, the answerer:
  • MUST insert a corresponding "m=" line in the answer, with an "m="

line proto value [RFC3264] identical to the value in the offer;

  • MUST associate an SDP "setup" attribute with the "m=" line;
  • MUST associate an SDP "sctp-port" attribute with the "m=" line.

If the offer contained a new (different than the one currently

    used) SCTP port value, the answerer MUST also associate a new SCTP
    port value.  If the offer contained a zero SCTP port value, or if
    the answerer does not accept the SCTP association, the answerer
    MUST also associate a zero SCTP port value; and
  • MAY associate an SDP "max-message-size" attribute (Section 6) with

the "m=" line. The attribute value in the answer is independent

    of the value (if present) in the corresponding "m=" line of the
    offer.
 Once the answerer has sent the answer:
  • in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP, if a TCP connection has not yet been

established or an existing TCP connection is to be closed and

    replaced by a new one, the answerer MUST follow the procedures in
    [RFC4145] for closing and establishing a TCP connection;
  • if a DTLS association has not yet been established or an existing

DTLS association is to be closed and replaced by a new one, the

    answerer MUST follow the procedures in [RFC8842] for closing the
    currently used DTLS association and establishing a new one; and
  • if an SCTP association has not yet been established or an existing

SCTP association is to be closed and replaced by a new one, the

    answerer MUST initiate the closing of the existing SCTP
    association (if applicable) and establishment of the new
    association.
 If the SDP "sctp-port" attribute in the answer contains an attribute
 value of zero, the answerer MUST NOT establish an SCTP association.
 If an SCTP association exists, the offerer MUST close it.
 If the answerer does not accept the "m=" line in the offer, it MUST
 assign a zero port value to the corresponding "m=" line in the
 answer, following the procedures in [RFC3264].  In addition, the
 answerer MUST NOT initiate the establishment of a TCP connection, a
 DTLS association, or a DTLS association associated with the "m="
 line.

10.4. Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer

 Once the offerer has received the answer:
  • in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP, if a TCP connection has not yet been

established or an existing TCP connection is to be closed and

    replaced by a new one, the offerer MUST follow the procedures in
    [RFC4145] for closing and establishing a TCP connection;
  • if a DTLS association has not yet been established or an existing

DTLS association is to be closed and replaced by a new one, the

    offerer MUST follow the procedures in [RFC8842] for closing and
    establishing a DTLS association; and
  • if an SCTP association has not yet been established or an existing

SCTP association is to be closed and replaced by a new one, the

    offerer MUST initiate the closing of the existing SCTP association
    (if applicable) and establishment of the new association.
 If the SDP "sctp-port" attribute in the answer contains an attribute
 value of zero, the offerer MUST NOT establish an SCTP association.
 If, in addition, an SCTP association exists, the offerer MUST close
 it.
 If the "m=" line in the answer contains a zero port value, the
 offerer MUST NOT initiate the establishment of a TCP connection, a
 DTLS association, or an SCTP association associated with the "m="
 line.  If, in addition, a TCP connection, DTLS association, or SCTP
 association exists, the offerer MUST close it.

10.5. Modifying the Session

 When an offerer sends an updated offer, in order to modify a
 previously established SCTP association, it follows the procedures in
 Section 10.2, with the following exceptions:
  • If the offerer wants to close an SCTP association and immediately

establish a new SCTP association, it MUST associate an SDP "sctp-

    port" attribute with a new (different than the one currently used)
    attribute value.  This will not impact the underlying DTLS
    association (or TCP connection, in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP).
  • If the offerer wants to close an SCTP association without

immediately establishing a new SCTP association, it MUST associate

    an SDP "sctp-port" attribute with an attribute value of zero.
    This will not impact the underlying DTLS association (or TCP
    connection, in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP).
  • If the offerer wants to establish an SCTP association, and another

SCTP association was previously closed, the offerer MUST associate

    an SDP "sctp-port" attribute with a new attribute value (different
    than the value associated with the previous SCTP association).  If
    the previous SCTP association was closed successfully following
    use of an SDP "sctp-port" attribute with an attribute value of
    zero, the offerer MAY use the same attribute value for the new
    SCTP association that was used with the previous SCTP association
    before it was closed.  This will not impact the underlying DTLS
    association (or TCP connection, in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP).
  • If the offerer wants to close an existing SCTP association and the

underlying DTLS association (and the underlying TCP connection, in

    the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP), it MUST assign a zero port value to
    the "m=" line associated with the SCTP and DTLS associations (and
    TCP connection, in the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP), following the
    procedures in [RFC3264].
  • NOTE: This specification does not define a mechanism for

explicitly closing a DTLS association while maintaining the

    overlying SCTP association.  However, if a DTLS association is
    closed and replaced with a new DTLS association as a result of
    some other action [RFC8842], the state of the SCTP association is
    not affected.
 The offerer follows the procedures in [RFC8842] regarding the DTLS
 association impacts when modifying a session.
 In the case of TCP/DTLS/SCTP, the offerer follows the procedures in
 [RFC4145] regarding the TCP connection impacts when modifying a
 session.

11. Multihoming Considerations

 Multihoming is not supported when sending SCTP on top of DTLS, as
 DTLS does not expose address management of the underlying transport
 protocols (UDP or TCP) to its upper layer.

12. NAT Considerations

12.1. General

 When SCTP-over-DTLS is used in a NAT environment, it relies on the
 NAT traversal procedures for the underlying transport protocol (UDP
 or TCP).

12.2. ICE Considerations

 When SCTP-over-DTLS is used with UDP-based ICE candidates [RFC8445],
 then the procedures for UDP/DTLS/SCTP (Section 7) are used.
 When SCTP-over-DTLS is used with TCP-based ICE candidates [RFC6544],
 then the procedures for TCP/DTLS/SCTP (Section 8) are used.
 In ICE environments, during the nomination process, endpoints go
 through multiple ICE candidate pairs until the most preferred
 candidate pair is found.  During the nomination process, data can be
 sent as soon as the first working candidate pair is found, but the
 nomination process still continues, and selected candidate pairs can
 still change while data is sent.  Furthermore, if endpoints roam
 between networks -- for instance, when a mobile endpoint switches
 from mobile connection to WiFi -- endpoints will initiate an ICE
 restart.  This will trigger a new nomination process between the new
 set of candidates, which will likely result in the new nominated
 candidate pair.
 Implementations MUST treat all ICE candidate pairs associated with an
 SCTP association on top of a DTLS association as part of the same
 DTLS association.  Thus, there will only be one SCTP handshake and
 one DTLS handshake even if there are multiple valid candidate pairs;
 shifting from one candidate pair to another, including switching
 between UDP and TCP candidate pairs, will not impact the SCTP or DTLS
 associations.  If new candidates are added, they will also be part of
 the same SCTP and DTLS associations.  When transitioning between
 candidate pairs, different candidate pairs can be currently active in
 different directions, and implementations MUST be ready to receive
 data on any of the candidates, even if this means sending and
 receiving data using UDP/DTLS/SCTP and TCP/DTLS/SCTP at the same time
 in different directions.
 In order to maximize the likelihood of interoperability between the
 endpoints, all ICE-enabled SCTP-over-DTLS endpoints SHOULD implement
 support for UDP/DTLS/SCTP.
 When an SDP offer or answer is sent with multiple ICE candidates
 during initial connection negotiation or after ICE restart, UDP-based
 candidates SHOULD be included, and the default candidate SHOULD be
 chosen from one of those UDP candidates.  The proto value MUST match
 the transport protocol associated with the default candidate.  If UDP
 transport is used for the default candidate, then the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP"
 proto value MUST be used.  If TCP transport is used for the default
 candidate, then the "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value MUST be used.  Note
 that under normal circumstances, the proto value for offers and
 answers sent during ICE nomination SHOULD be "UDP/DTLS/SCTP".
 When a subsequent SDP offer or answer is sent after ICE nomination is
 complete, and it does not initiate ICE restart, it will contain only
 the nominated ICE candidate pair.  In this case, the proto value MUST
 match the transport protocol associated with the nominated ICE
 candidate pair.  If UDP transport is used for the nominated pair,
 then the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value MUST be used.  If TCP transport
 is used for the nominated pair, then the "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" proto value
 MUST be used.  Please note that if an endpoint switches between TCP-
 based and UDP-based candidates during the nomination process, the
 endpoint is not required to send an SDP offer for the sole purpose of
 keeping the proto value of the associated "m=" line in sync.
    |  NOTE: The text in the paragraph above only applies when the
    |  usage of ICE has been negotiated.  If ICE is not used, the
    |  proto value MUST always reflect the transport protocol used at
    |  any given time.

13. Examples

13.1. Establishment of UDP/DTLS/SCTP Association

 SDP Offer:
 m=application 54111 UDP/DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel
 c=IN IP6 2001:DB8::A8FD
 a=tls-id:abc3de65cddef001be82
 a=setup:actpass
 a=fingerprint:SHA-256 \
 12:DF:3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB:4A:AD:B9:B1:3F:82:18:3B:54:02:12:DF: \
 3E:5D:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB:4A:AD
 a=sctp-port:5000
 a=max-message-size:100000
  • The offerer indicates that the usage of the UDP/DTLS/SCTP

association will be as defined for the "webrtc-datachannel" format

    value.
  • The offerer UDP port value is 54111.
  • The offerer SCTP port value is 5000.
  • The offerer indicates that it can take either the client or the

server DTLS role.

 SDP Answer:
 m=application 64300 UDP/DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel
 c=IN IP6 2001:DB8::001D
 a=tls-id:dbc8de77cddef001be90
 a=setup:passive
 a=fingerprint:SHA-256 \
 3F:82:18:3B:49:6B:19:E5:7C:AB:4A:AD:B9:B1:12:DF:3E:5D:12:DF:54:02: \
 49:6B:3E:5D:7C:AB:19:E5:AD:4A
 a=sctp-port:6000
 a=max-message-size:100000
 Note that due to RFC formatting conventions, this document splits SDP
 across lines whose content would exceed 72 characters.  A backslash
 character marks where this line folding has taken place.  This
 backslash and its trailing CRLF and whitespace would not appear in
 actual SDP content.
  • The answerer UDP port value is 64300.
  • The answerer SCTP port value is 6000.
  • The answerer takes the server DTLS role.

14. Security Considerations

 [RFC4566] defines general SDP security considerations, while
 [RFC3264], [RFC4145], and [RFC8122] define security considerations
 when using the SDP offer/answer mechanism to negotiate media streams.
 [RFC4960] defines general SCTP security considerations, and [RFC8261]
 defines security considerations when using SCTP on top of DTLS.
 This specification does not introduce new security considerations in
 addition to those defined in the specifications listed above.

15. IANA Considerations

15.1. New SDP Proto Values

 This document updates the "Session Description Protocol (SDP)
 Parameters" registry, following the procedures in [RFC4566], by
 adding the following values to the table in the SDP "proto" field
 registry:
                 +=======+===============+===========+
                 |  Type |    SDP Name   | Reference |
                 +=======+===============+===========+
                 | proto | UDP/DTLS/SCTP |  RFC 8841 |
                 +-------+---------------+-----------+
                 | proto | TCP/DTLS/SCTP |  RFC 8841 |
                 +-------+---------------+-----------+
                   Table 2: SDP "proto" Field Values

15.2. New SDP Attributes

15.2.1. sctp-port

 This document defines a new SDP media-level attribute,"sctp-port".
 The details of the attribute are defined in Section 5.2.

15.2.2. max-message-size

 This document defines a new SDP media-level attribute,"max-message-
 size".  The details of the attribute are defined in Section 6.2.

15.3. association-usage Name Registry

 Per this specification, a new IANA registry has been created,
 following the procedures in [RFC8126], for the namespace associated
 with the "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" protocol identifiers.
 Each fmt value describes the usage of an entire SCTP association,
 including all SCTP streams associated with the SCTP association.
    |  NOTE: Usage indication of individual SCTP streams is outside
    |  the scope of this specification.
 The fmt value "association-usage" used with these "proto" values is
 required.  It is defined in Section 4.
 As part of this registry, IANA maintains the following information:
 association-usage name:  The identifier of the subprotocol, as will
    be used as the fmt value.
 association-usage reference:  A reference to the document in which
    the association-usage is defined.
 association-usage names are to be subject to the "First Come First
 Served" IANA registration policy [RFC8126].
 IANA has added the following initial values to the registry.
              +====================+====================+
              | Name               | Reference          |
              +====================+====================+
              | webrtc-datachannel | RFC 8832, RFC 8841 |
              +--------------------+--------------------+
              +--------------------+--------------------+
                      Table 3: IANA Initial Values

16. References

16.1. Normative References

 [RFC0793]  Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7,
            RFC 793, DOI 10.17487/RFC0793, September 1981,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc793>.
 [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>.
 [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
            with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3264>.
 [RFC4145]  Yon, D. and G. Camarillo, "TCP-Based Media Transport in
            the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4145,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC4145, September 2005,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4145>.
 [RFC4566]  Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session
            Description Protocol", RFC 4566, DOI 10.17487/RFC4566,
            July 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4566>.
 [RFC4571]  Lazzaro, J., "Framing Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP)
            and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Packets over Connection-
            Oriented Transport", RFC 4571, DOI 10.17487/RFC4571, July
            2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4571>.
 [RFC4960]  Stewart, R., Ed., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol",
            RFC 4960, DOI 10.17487/RFC4960, September 2007,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4960>.
 [RFC6347]  Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
            Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347,
            January 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6347>.
 [RFC6544]  Rosenberg, J., Keranen, A., Lowekamp, B. B., and A. B.
            Roach, "TCP Candidates with Interactive Connectivity
            Establishment (ICE)", RFC 6544, DOI 10.17487/RFC6544,
            March 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6544>.
 [RFC8122]  Lennox, J. and C. Holmberg, "Connection-Oriented Media
            Transport over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
            in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 8122,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8122, March 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8122>.
 [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
            Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
            RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
 [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>.
 [RFC8261]  Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Jesup, R., and S. Loreto,
            "Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Encapsulation of
            SCTP Packets", RFC 8261, DOI 10.17487/RFC8261, November
            2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8261>.
 [RFC8842]  Holmberg, C. and R. Shpount, "Session Description Protocol
            (SDP) Offer/Answer Considerations for Datagram Transport
            Layer Security (DTLS) and Transport Layer Security (TLS)",
            RFC 8842, DOI 10.17487/RFC8842, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8842>.
 [RFC8859]  Nandakumar, S., "A Framework for Session Description
            Protocol (SDP) Attributes When Multiplexing", RFC 8859,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8859, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8859>.

16.2. Informative References

 [RFC8445]  Keranen, A., Holmberg, C., and J. Rosenberg, "Interactive
            Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network
            Address Translator (NAT) Traversal", RFC 8445,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8445, July 2018,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8445>.
 [RFC8831]  Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tüxen, "WebRTC Data
            Channels", RFC 8831, DOI 10.17487/RFC8831, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8831>.
 [RFC8832]  Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tüxen, "WebRTC Data Channel
            Establishment Protocol", RFC 8832, DOI 10.17487/RFC8832,
            January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8832>.
 [RFC8864]  Drage, K., Makaraju, M., Ejzak, R., Marcon, J., and R.
            Even, Ed., "Negotiation Data Channels Using the Session
            Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 8864,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC8864, January 2021,
            <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8864>.

Acknowledgements

 The authors wish to thank Harald Alvestrand, Randell Jesup, Paul
 Kyzivat, Michael Tüxen, Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler, Flemming Andreasen,
 and Ari Keränen for their comments and useful feedback.  Ben Campbell
 provided comments as part of his Area Director review.  Brian
 Carpenter performed the Gen-ART review.

Authors' Addresses

 Christer Holmberg
 Ericsson
 Hirsalantie 11
 FI-02420 Jorvas
 Finland
 Email: christer.holmberg@ericsson.com
 Roman Shpount
 TurboBridge
 4905 Del Ray Avenue, Suite 300
 Bethesda, MD 20814
 United States of America
 Phone: +1 (240) 292-6632
 Email: rshpount@turbobridge.com
 Salvatore Loreto
 Ericsson
 Grönlandsgatan 31
 Kista
 Sweden
 Email: Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com
 Gonzalo Camarillo
 Ericsson
 Hirsalantie 11
 FI-02420 Jorvas
 Finland
 Email: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com
/home/gen.uk/domains/wiki.gen.uk/public_html/data/pages/rfc/rfc8841.txt · Last modified: 2021/01/18 21:11 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki