RFC 8224: Authenticated Identity Management in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The baseline security mechanisms in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) are inadequate for cryptographically assuring the identity of the end users that originate SIP requests, especially in an interdomain context. This document defines a mechanism for securely identifying originators of SIP requests. It does so by defining a SIP header field for conveying a signature used for validating the identity and for conveying a reference to the credentials of the signer. This document obsoletes RFC 4474.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8224
- Published
- February 2018
- Authors
- J. Peterson; C. Jennings; E. Rescorla; C. Wendt
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- art
- Pages
- 46
- Also known as
- —
Topics
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 9060Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (STIR) Certificate DelegationCurrent
September 2021
- RFC 7375Secure Telephone Identity Threat ModelCurrent
October 2014
- RFC 7340Secure Telephone Identity Problem Statement and RequirementsCurrent
September 2014
- RFC 8396Managing, Ordering, Distributing, Exposing, and Registering Telephone Numbers (MODERN): Problem Statement, Use Cases, and FrameworkCurrent
July 2018
- RFC 8850Controlling Multiple Streams for Telepresence (CLUE) Protocol Data ChannelCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 8197A SIP Response Code for Unwanted CallsCurrent
July 2017
- RFC 8262Content-ID Header Field in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Current
October 2017
- RFC 8266Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing NicknamesCurrent
October 2017
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?