rfc:rfc5125
Network Working Group T. Taylor Request for Comments: 5125 Nortel Obsoletes: 3525 February 2008 Category: Informational
Reclassification of RFC 3525 to Historic
Status of This Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Abstract
This document reclassifies RFC 3525, Gateway Control Protocol Version
1, to Historic Status. This memo also obsoletes RFC 3525.
1. Introduction
The purpose of this document is to reclassify RFC 3525, Gateway
Control Protocol Version 1, to Historic Status.
2. Reclassification of RFC 3525 to Historic
The protocol defined by RFC 3525 [RFC3525] was developed jointly by
the IETF Megaco Working Group and ITU-T Study Group 16. The ITU-T
published ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1 (originally H.248) with the
same contents as RFC 3525. Since that initial development, the ITU-T
has taken ownership of the protocol and has continued to work on it.
The protocol as originally defined in RFC 3525 underwent a series of
corrections and clarifications. H.248.1 version 1 [h248v1] was
republished in March, 2002, incorporating all changes agreed upon up
to that date. Since then, further corrections have been agreed upon.
The accumulated set of corrections to H.248.1 (03/2002) is available
in the Implementors' Guide for Recommendation H.248.1 Version 1 (03/
2002) ("Media Gateway Control Protocol") [impgdv1], which is
available at no charge on the ITU-T web site.
RFC 3525 has been rendered even more obsolete as a specification of the Megaco/H.248 protocol by the publication of further versions of ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1. Version 2 [h248v2] was published in May, 2002, and is the version most widely deployed at present. It is also the version that other standards bodies such as 3GPP are currently using as the basis for their own profile specifications. Version 3 [h248v3] was published more recently, in September, 2005.
Taylor Informational [Page 1] RFC 5125 RFC 3525 to Historic February 2008
In short, RFC 3525 may serve as an introduction to the Megaco/H.248
protocol, but it is misleading as a description of the protocol as
currently standardized or deployed. It is appropriate to reclassify
RFC 3525 to Historic status, as described in RFC 2026 [RFC2026].
3. Security Considerations
Reclassifying RFC 3525 has no security implications.
4. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any new actions by the IANA. The IANA registries established by RFC 3525 and extended by successive versions of ITU-T H.248.1 remain in force, along with the requirement for expert review by an IESG-designated expert.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC3525] Groves, C., Ed., Pantaleo, M., Ed., Anderson, T., Ed., and
T. Taylor, Ed., "Gateway Control Protocol Version 1", RFC
3525, June 2003.
5.2. Informative References
[h248v1] International Telecommunication Union, "Gateway control
protocol: Version 1", ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1, March
2002.
[h248v2] International Telecommunication Union, "Gateway control
protocol: Version 2", ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1, May
2002.
[h248v3] International Telecommunication Union, "Gateway control
protocol: Version 3", ITU-T Recommendation H.248.1,
September 2005.
[impgdv1] International Telecommunication Union, "Implementors'
Guide for Recommendation H.248.1 Version 1 (03/2002)
("Media Gateway Control Protocol")", ITU-T Recommendation
H.248.1, April 2006.
Taylor Informational [Page 2] RFC 5125 RFC 3525 to Historic February 2008
Author's Address
Tom Taylor Nortel 1852 Lorraine Ave Ottawa, Ontario K1H 6Z8 Canada
EMail: taylor@nortel.com
Taylor Informational [Page 3] RFC 5125 RFC 3525 to Historic February 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Taylor Informational [Page 4]
/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc5125.txt · Last modified: 2008/02/05 23:32 by 127.0.0.1