RFC 5360: A Framework for Consent-Based Communications in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
SIP supports communications for several services, 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 amplification and DoS (Denial of Service) attacks. This document identifies a framework for consent-based communications in SIP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5360
- Published
- October 2008
- Authors
- J. Rosenberg; G. Camarillo; D. Willis
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 31
- Also known as
- —
- Updated by:
- RFC 8217
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5359Session Initiation Protocol Service ExamplesCurrent
October 2008
- RFC 5361A Document Format for Requesting ConsentCurrent
October 2008
- RFC 5362The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Pending Additions Event PackageCurrent
October 2008
- RFC 5363Framework and Security Considerations for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) URI-List ServicesCurrent
October 2008
- RFC 5364Extensible Markup Language (XML) Format Extension for Representing Copy Control Attributes in Resource ListsUpdated
October 2008
- RFC 5365Multiple-Recipient MESSAGE Requests in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
October 2008
- RFC 5366Conference Establishment Using Request-Contained Lists in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
October 2008
- RFC 5367Subscriptions to Request-Contained Resource Lists in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
October 2008
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?