Date post: | 19-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
- 1 -
IANA Registration for ENUMservice Mobile Web
draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb-01
Aug. 5. 2005
Jongyun Ra, Sungwoo Shin, Yongwan Ju, Weon Kim
National Internet Development Agency of Korea
Lawrence Conroy
Roke Manor Research Ltd
- 2 -
Backgroundo As the market of mobile telephony service has kept growing up, the number of mobile internet users has been gradually increasing
Oceania
America
Africa
Asia
Europe
2003 Mobile Subscriberfrom ITU Reports
Unit : K
559,206.6
442,838.4
293,498.6
50,962.7
17,264.6
1,367,518.1
o In Korea, the number of mobile internet users has reached nearly 7,180K (23% of total Internet users in Korea)
o Mobile ENUM usage will be of high importance according to its convenience and portability; the number of mobile devices with Internet access that can take advantage of the convenience may well outweigh those with fixed connectivity
- 3 -
Abstract
o This document registers the ENUMservice ‘mobileweb’ using the URI
scheme ‘http:’ , ‘https:’ as per the IANA registration process defined
in the ENUM specification RFC3761
o Mobile webpages are smaller and simpler than web pages for general
use; the mobile webpages are designed to fit within the pocket-sized
display of mobile terminals, and to reflect the ‘long pipes’ by which
these terminals are connected.
o This ENUMservice indicates that the resource identified by the
associated URI is capable of being a source of information through
a mobile webpage.
o There are various services that can be associated with E.164 number
used in ENUM. Some RFC documents define types, subtypes and
URI schemes for registering some of them as ENUMservices
- RFC3762(h.323), RFC3764(sip), RFC3953(presence), RFC4002(web and ft)
- 4 -
General Web vs Mobile Web
General Web Mobile Web Note
MainTerminal
Desktop, Laptop Cellular(Mobile) Phone -
AccessInternet Explorer,
Netscape Navigator, …..
Mobile Browser forWAP, ME or i-mode -
MajorMark-up
LanguageHTML
WAP : WML,
ME : m-HTML,
i-mode : c-HTML
-
TransportProtocols
HTTP(S)WAP : WSP / WTP↔HTTP(S)
ME/i-mode : HTTP(S) -
Network Band/Latency
Broad / Short Narrow / Long -
Mobile web service registration not described in RFC4002
- 5 -
WAP ME i-mode
Major Markup
LanguageWML m-HTML c-HTML
ProtocolTransition
(server to client)
HTTP→WSP/WTP,TCP →WDP,IP→Bearer
Wired →WirelessTCP →TL
IP →PMAP →CallCtlWired →Wireless
LeadingOrganization
WAP Forum
(Ericsson, Nokia,
….350 companies)
Microsoft,
Qualcomm
W3C,
NTT Docomo
ImplementationNecessities
WAP Gateway -M-PGW,
PPM
WAP vs ME vs i-mode
- 6 -
WAP vs ME vs i-mode(cont’d)
DeviceWSPWTPWTLSWDP
Bearer
WAP G/WWSPWTPWTLSWDP
Bearer
HTTP
SSLTCPIP
Web server
HTTP
SSLTCPIP
WAP (1.x)
WML
Page
ME
Interworking FunctionTCPIP
TCPIP
Web server
HTTP
SSLTCPIP
m-HTML
Page
WiredWiredWireless
Terminal
HTTP
SSL/TLSTCPIP
Wireless
TerminalHTTPTLSTL
CallCtlWireless
M-PGWTLS
IP(PMAP)Wired
TLS
IPWired
Web server
HTTP
TLSTCPIP
i-mode
PPMCallCtl
WirelessIP(PMAP)
Wired Wired
TL TCP
cHTML
Page
WML
Page
m-HTML
Page
cHTML
Page
cHTML
Page
- 7 -
Mobile Web Environment
“E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://www.ibm.com!”
“E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!”
+82-2-2186-4500
General Web Mobile Web
URIs http://www.ibm.com http://m.ibm.com
Page Views
Terminals Desktop / Laptop Cellular(Mobile) Phone
How to distinguish general web from
mobile web ?
The standard described in RFC 4002 can not cover mobile web at all
RFC 4002
- 8 -
Mobile Web Environment(cont’d)
WAP ME i-mode
Terminals
URI http://w.ibm.com http://m.ibm.com http://i.ibm.com
Cellular(Mobile) Phone
“E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://w.ibm.com!”
“E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!”
“E2U+web:http” “!^.*$!http://i.ibm.com!”
+82-2-2186-4500
How to distinguish the protocol for mobile
webpage from another protocol?WAP Support
ME Support
i-mode support
RFC 4002
- 9 -
Draft Proposals
o The ENUMservice registration used by a mobile web must be
classified according to the protocol architecture that mobile web uses;
it needs to use another ENUMservice registration from that specified
in RFC 4002o There are two choices of ENUMservice registration of mobile web;
these are ‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’ and ‘Uniform
Mobile Web Service Registration’
o ‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’ uses ENUMservice Type
‘mobileweb’ and different ENUMservice Subtypes according to the
mobile web protocol architectures(WAP, ME, i-mode)
o ‘Uniform Mobile Web Service Registration’ uses ENUMservice Type
‘mobileweb’ but does not use any ENUMservice Subtype
- 10 -
Draft Proposals(cont’d)
ENUMservices mobileweb
‘Diverse Mobile Web Service Registration’
Enumservice Name: "mobileweb"
Enumservice Type: "mobileweb"
Enumservice Subtype: "wap", "me", "imode"
URI Scheme: 'http:', 'https'
Functional Specification: This ENUMservice indicates
that the associated resource identified by URI scheme is
a mobile webpage
Example : “E2U+mobileweb:me” “!^.*$!http://m.ibm.com!”
- 11 -
Draft Proposals(cont’d)
2. What if the protocols of mobile web service are unified and integrated to one(e.g WAP2 or other) in the future ?
Enumservice Name: "mobileweb"
Enumservice Type: "mobileweb"
Enumservice Subtype: N/A
URI Scheme: 'http:', 'https'
Functional Specification: This ENUMservice indicates
that the associated resource identified by URI scheme is
a mobile webpage
Example : “E2U+mobileweb” “!^.*$!http://mobile.ibm.com!”
1. What if the mobile web service is provided using a same URI regardless of the protocols of mobile web service?(namely, mobile web server is intelligent and can branch connection properly)
So, this draft proposes ‘Uniform Mobile Web Service Registration’
- 12 -
Conclusion
RFC 4002 draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb
General web registration Mobile web registration
- 13 -
Thank you