RFC 4189: Requirements for End-to-Middle Security for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent (UA) does not always trust all intermediaries in its request path to inspect its message bodies and/or headers contained in its message. The UA might want to protect the message bodies and/or headers from intermediaries, except those that provide services based on its content. This situation requires a mechanism called "end-to-middle security" to secure the information passed between the UA and intermediaries, which does not interfere with end-to-end security. This document defines a set of requirements for a mechanism to achieve end-to-middle security. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4189
- Published
- October 2005
- Authors
- K. Ono; S. Tachimoto
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 12
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 3840Indicating User Agent Capabilities in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
August 2004
- RFC 4730A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package for Key Press Stimulus (KPML)Current
November 2006
- RFC 4916Connected Identity in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
June 2007
- RFC 3329Security Mechanism Agreement for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Updated
January 2003
- RFC 3327Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension Header Field for Registering Non-Adjacent ContactsUpdated
December 2002
- RFC 3324Short Term Requirements for Network Asserted IdentityCurrent
December 2002
- RFC 4409Message Submission for MailObsoleted
April 2006
- RFC 3938Video-Message Message-ContextCurrent
October 2004
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?