RFC 4453: Requirements for Consent-Based Communications in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports communications across many media types, including real-time audio, video, text, instant messaging, and presence. In its current form, it allows session invitations, instant messages, and other requests to be delivered from one party to another without requiring explicit consent of the recipient. Without such consent, it is possible for SIP to be used for malicious purposes, including spam and denial-of-service attacks. This document identifies a set of requirements for extensions to SIP that add consent-based communications. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4453
- Published
- April 2006
- Authors
- J. Rosenberg; G. Camarillo; D. Willis
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 8
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4474Enhancements for Authenticated Identity Management in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Obsoleted
August 2006
- RFC 4475Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Torture Test MessagesCurrent
May 2006
- RFC 4479A Data Model for PresenceCurrent
July 2006
- RFC 4480RPID: Rich Presence Extensions to the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF)Current
July 2006
- RFC 4481Timed Presence Extensions to the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) to Indicate Status Information for Past and Future Time IntervalsCurrent
July 2006
- RFC 4425RTP Payload Format for Video Codec 1 (VC-1)Current
February 2006
- RFC 4424Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) Payload Format for the Variable-Rate Multimode Wideband (VMR-WB) Extension Audio CodecCurrent
February 2006
- RFC 4482CIPID: Contact Information for the Presence Information Data FormatCurrent
July 2006
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?