1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725
|
<pre>Network Working Group K. Mimura
Request for Comments: 4160 K. Yokoyama
Category: Informational T. Satoh
C. Kanaide
TOYO Communication Equipment
C. Allocchio
Consortium GARR
August 2005
<span class="h1">Internet Fax Gateway Requirements</span>
Status of This Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
To allow connectivity between the General Switched Telephone Network
facsimile service (GSTN fax) and the e-mail-based Internet Fax
service (i-fax) an "Internet Fax Gateway" is required. This document
provides recommendations for the functionality of Internet Fax
Gateways. In this context, an "offramp gateway" provides facsimile
data transmission from i-fax to GSTN fax; vice versa, an "onramp
gateway" provides data transmission form GSTN fax to i-fax. The
recommendations in this document apply to the integrated service
including Internet Fax terminals, computers with i-fax software on
the Internet, and GSTN Fax terminals on the GSTN.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction</span>
An Internet Fax Gateway provides connectivity and translation between
the General Switched Telephone Network facsimile service (GSTN fax)
and the e-mail-based Internet Fax service (i-fax). This document
defines the recommended behavior of an Internet Fax Gateway. An
Internet Fax Gateway can be classified as "onramp", when a facsimile
is transferred from GSTN fax to the Internet Fax, and as "offramp",
when a facsimile is transferred from Internet Fax to GSTN fax. For a
more detailed definition of "onramp" and "offramp" within i-fax
service, see [<a href="#ref-1" title=""Terminology and Goals for Internet Fax"">1</a>].
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
This document provides recommendations only for the specific case
hereunder:
1) the operational mode of the Internet Fax is "store and forward",
as defined in Section 2.5 of [<a href="#ref-1" title=""Terminology and Goals for Internet Fax"">1</a>].
2) The format of image data is the data format defined by "simple
mode" in [<a href="#ref-4" title=""A Simple Mode of Facsimile Using Internet Mail"">4</a>].
This document does not apply to the gateway functions for "real-time
Internet Fax", as described and defined in [<a href="#ref-3" title=""Procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile communication over IP networks"">3</a>]. Additional
recommendations for optional functionality are described in [<a href="#ref-24" title=""Guidelines for Optional Services for Internet Fax Gateways"">24</a>].
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1" href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>. Key Words</span>
The key words "MUST", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [<a href="#ref-5" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">5</a>].
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Internet Fax Gateway Operations</span>
An onramp gateway receives a facsimile from a GSTN fax device (which
may include an offramp gateway itself), and generates an Internet Fax
over the Internet, which is sent to any Internet Fax device.
An offramp gateway receives an Internet Fax over the Internet from
any Internet Fax-capable device (which may include an onramp gateway
or a PC), and generates a GSTN fax, which is sent to any GSTN fax
device.
In both of these cases, the Internet side of the gateway acts as an
Internet Fax device, as described in [<a href="#ref-4" title=""A Simple Mode of Facsimile Using Internet Mail"">4</a>], while the GSTN side of the
gateway acts as a GSTN fax device, as described in [<a href="#ref-6" title=""Procedures for document facsimile transmission in the general switched telephone network"">6</a>].
In this document we will only thus recommend the actions that occur
while
1) the onramp gateway converts a fax received from GSTN and forwards
it to the Internet Fax service;
2) the offramp gateway converts a fax received from the Internet and
forwards it to the GSTN fax service.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. The Offramp Gateway Operations</span>
An offramp gateway MUST, as a minimal requirement, perform the
following functions:
- address translation/mapping,
- image format conversion, and
- error/return notification handling
and MAY also perform
- user authorization.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1" href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>. User Authorization</span>
An offramp gateway MAY have a user authorization function to confirm
that a user is allowed to transmit its Internet Fax to the GSTN fax
service.
Because an Internet Fax is sent as a MIME e-mail message to the
offramp gateway, digital signatures can be used to authenticate and
authorize the user. S/MIME is one example of a protocol that
includes digital signature services. S/MIME is described in
[<a href="#ref-9" title=""Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)"">9</a>][10][<a href="#ref-11" title=""Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.1 Certificate Handling"">11</a>][12][<a href="#ref-13" title=""Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME"">13</a>]. Other methods of adding a digital signature to
a mail message (such as OpenPGP [<a href="#ref-17" title=""OpenPGP Message Format"">17</a>] [<a href="#ref-25" title=""MIME Security with OpenPGP"">25</a>]) MAY also be used to
authenticate and authorize the user.
The agent sending the Internet Fax (which may include an onramp
gateway) sends the digitally-signed S/MIME or OpenPGP Fax message to
the offramp gateway. The offramp gateway then compares the
credentials of the user to determine if he/she is authorized to send
faxes to the GSTN fax service. If the authorization process fails,
then the offramp gateway MUST generate an error delivery notification
for the sender of the Internet Fax.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2" href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>. Addressing</span>
An Internet Fax may contain multiple e-mail addresses, both as
originators, and as recipients. For its forwarding function to GSTN
fax service, an offramp gateway MUST only consider those addresses
which are explicitly itself, i.e., those where the right-hand side of
the e-mail address corresponds to the offramp gateway.
Because addresses on the Internet Fax service are e-mail addresses,
in order to reach a destination in the GSTN fax service, the offramp
gateway MUST convert e-mail addresses into GSTN addresses.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
The GSTN destination address SHOULD normally be encoded inside the
left-hand side of the e-mail address, according to [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>]. However, an
offramp gateway MAY use locally implemented translation rules to map
left-hand side strings into GSTN addresses.
In any case, the offramp gateway MUST process the resultant GSTN
address and convert it to a "local-phone", in accordance with local
dialing rules.
"Global-phone" is defined in Section 2 of [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>]. "Local-phone" is
defined in Section 2 of [<a href="#ref-8" title=""GSTN Address Element Extensions in E-mail Services"">8</a>]. "Exit-code" is defined in <a href="#section-2.1">Section 2.1</a>
of [<a href="#ref-8" title=""GSTN Address Element Extensions in E-mail Services"">8</a>].
The offramp gateway SHOULD also have a function to apply translation
to originator addresses and other addresses referred to into the
Internet Fax, in order to ensure a possible return path from GSTN fax
service to Internet Fax destinations, including other offramp
gateways. These functions MUST be compliant with the address
handling of onramp gateways that is described in <a href="#section-4.2">Section 4.2</a> of this
document.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2.1" href="#section-3.2.1">3.2.1</a>. Examples of Local Dialing Rules Applied to GSTN Destination</span>
<span class="h4"> Addresses</span>
The first example shows how an offramp gateway converts a "global-
phone" to a "local-phone" by removing the "+" and "44" (recognizing
the international country code is local), and then knowing it can
dial directly without an exit-code:
global-phone: +441164960348
resulting in:
local-phone: 1164960348
The next example shows how an offramp gateway converts a "global-
phone" to a "local-phone" by removing the "+" and "44" (recognizing
the international country code is local), and then adding the exit-
code "0" in front of the string:
global-phone: +441164960348
resulting in:
local-phone: 01164960348
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
The next example shows how an offramp gateway converts a "global-
phone" to "local-phone" by removing the "+" and "44" (recognizing the
international country code is local), and then adding the long
distance "0" in front of the string:
global-phone: +441164960348
resulting in:
local-phone: 01164960348
The last example shows how an offramp gateway converts a "global-
phone" to a "local-phone" by removing the "+", recognizing the
international country code is non-local, and adding the local
international dialing prefix "00" in front of the string:
global-phone: +441164960348
resulting in:
local-phone: 00441164960348
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2.2" href="#section-3.2.2">3.2.2</a>. Support for Subaddress</span>
An offramp gateway SHOULD support the subaddress. If a subaddress is
encoded into the left-hand side of the e-mail address [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>], then it
MUST be used by the offramp gateway, as specified in T.33 [<a href="#ref-15" title=""Facsimile routing utilizing the subaddress"">15</a>], to
reach the final GSTN fax recipient.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.3" href="#section-3.3">3.3</a>. Image Format Conversion</span>
An offramp gateway MUST convert the file format from TIFF Profile-S
for Internet Fax (defined in [<a href="#ref-16" title=""File Format for Internet Fax"">16</a>]) into the GSTN fax image format.
Other Internet Fax file formats are not considered in this document.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.4" href="#section-3.4">3.4</a>. Error/Return Notification Handling</span>
An offramp gateway SHOULD have a function that allows it to send a
return notice to the originator Internet Fax device (defined in [<a href="#ref-4" title=""A Simple Mode of Facsimile Using Internet Mail"">4</a>])
when a transmission error occurs over the GSTN fax service and the
facsimile is not delivered to the destination. The return notice
MUST be in Message Delivery Notification (MDN) format and delivered
by the offramp gateway over the Internet e-mail transport service
used by Internet Fax. The MDN disposition-type MUST be set as
"processed", and the disposition-modifier MUST be set as an "error".
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
If the offramp gateway fails to transmit the MDN, the error
information MAY be recorded to a log, and processing MAY end, or the
administrator of the gateway system MAY be notified of these errors
through a specific method (for example, by an e-mail message).
The more complex case of Delivery Status Notification (DSN) requests
handling is not considered in this document.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. The Onramp Gateway Operations</span>
An onramp gateway MUST, as minimal requirement, perform the following
functions:
- address translation/mapping,
- image format conversion, and
- error/return notification handling,
and MAY also perform
- user authorization.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.1" href="#section-4.1">4.1</a>. User Authorization</span>
An onramp gateway MAY have a user authorization function to confirm
that the user is authorized to transmit a facsimile to the Internet
fax service. For example, user authorization may be accomplished by
getting a user-ID and password received by Dual Tone Multi-Frequency
(DTMF), or via a local authorization table based on the GSTN caller-
ID.
If the authorization process fails, then the onramp gateway MUST
generate an error message/code for the sender of the GSTN Fax.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2" href="#section-4.2">4.2</a>. Address Translation/Mapping</span>
Addresses on Internet Fax service are e-mail addresses, thus a
recipient of an Internet Fax might be either an e-mail user, an
Internet Fax device with its own recipients/users, or an offramp
gateway. The onramp gateway SHOULD have a functionality in order to
receive from GSTN (via DTMF) destination addresses. However, there
are two categories of destination addresses:
- e-mail users and Internet Fax recipient/users
- real GSTN addresses reached via an offramp gateway
We define "indirect address mapping" as the functionality for the
first category, and "direct address mapping" as the functionality for
the second category.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.1" href="#section-4.2.1">4.2.1</a>. Indirect Address Mapping</span>
The onramp gateway MAY implement local address mapping mechanisms
(via a table, directory lookup, or something similar) that permit
translation from addresses (called "indirect address numbers")
received from the GSTN fax sending device into e-mail addresses. A
single e-mail address or a list of e-mail addresses MAY correspond to
a single indirect address number.
Here is one mapping example:
(1) An onramp gateway receives the indirect address number "1234"
from the source GSTN facsimile by DTMF.
1234
(2) The destination address is looked up in the address mapping
table.
address mapping table
1234 : ifax@example.com
(3) An Internet Fax is sent to the address ("addr-spec")
ifax@example.com
"Addr-spec" is defined in Section 3.4.1 of [<a href="#ref-14" title=""Internet Message Format"">14</a>].
If the address mapping lookup fails, an error MUST be reported to the
originating GSTN fax device.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.2" href="#section-4.2.2">4.2.2</a>. Direct Address Mapping</span>
If the indirect address mapping specified in 4.2.1 is not
implemented, then only "direct address mapping" can be used. The
GSTN sending device SHOULD send the full numeric destination address
to the onramp gateway via DTMF. Direct address mapping can also be
used if indirect address mapping is implemented.
An example:
(1) An onramp gateway receives the destination telephone number
"441164960348" from the source facsimile by DTMF.
441164960348
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
(2) The destination number is encoded as a "global-phone", so "+" is
added to the head of the string.
+441164960348
(3) "FAX=" is added in order to build the "fax-mbox" address item
FAX=+441164960348
(4) The destination address is completed, adding the specification of
the appropriate offramp gateway, which is supposed to handle the
delivery of the fax message to a global-phone address.
FAX=+441164960348@example.com
The procedure for choosing the domain name of an offramp gateway is
defined in <a href="#section-4.3">Section 4.3</a> ("Relay Function").
"Global-phone", "fax-mbox", and "fax-address" are defined in <a href="#section-2">Section</a>
<a href="#section-2">2</a> of [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>]. "Mta-I-fax" is defined in Section 3 of [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>]. "Fax-email"
is defined in Section 4 of [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>].
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.3" href="#section-4.2.3">4.2.3</a>. Sender Address Handling</span>
The onramp gateway SHOULD gather information about the GSTN fax
sender address (for example, via Caller-ID, if available) and encode
it as the sender of the Internet Fax, using the direct address
mapping (see <a href="#section-4.2.2">Section 4.2.2</a> of this document). The sender address
SHOULD be completed using the onramp gateway address, unless the
onramp gateway has additional information with which to specify a
different return path.
If the onramp gateway does not have any sender address information,
the Internet Fax sender address SHOULD be set to either a "no-reply"
address or an appropriate default mailbox.
<span class="h4"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.2.4" href="#section-4.2.4">4.2.4</a>. Support for Subaddress</span>
An onramp gateway SHOULD support the subaddress. In the case of
direct address mapping, the subaddress is specified using the T.33
[<a href="#ref-15" title=""Facsimile routing utilizing the subaddress"">15</a>] specification, and encoded as given in [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail"">7</a>]. In the case of
indirect address mapping, the subaddress MAY be contained inside the
address mapping table.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.3" href="#section-4.3">4.3</a>. Relay Function</span>
The onramp gateway SHOULD provide functionality for choosing the
destination offramp gateway by analyzing a destination fax number. A
possible method to expand or acquire information from the onramp
gateway about offramp gateways MAY include keeping cached information
about sender addresses that was sent by other onramp gateways.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.4" href="#section-4.4">4.4</a>. File Format Conversion</span>
An onramp gateway MUST convert the file format from a facsimile over
the GSTN to the file format TIFF Profile-S for Internet Fax, as
defined in [<a href="#ref-16" title=""File Format for Internet Fax"">16</a>].
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-4.6" href="#section-4.6">4.6</a>. Return Notice Handling</span>
When an onramp gateway receives and analyzes a return notice from the
Internet Fax destination, it MAY have the functionality to send the
delivery status to a suitable facsimile device on the GSTN through an
appropriate offramp gateway. The generated notice sent via GSTN fax
SHOULD contain both the human-readable notice information, and the
original delivery codes.
If the onramp gateway fails in the transmission of the return notice
back to GSTN fax service, the information MAY be recorded into a log,
and processing MAY end. As an alternate, the administrator of the
gateway system MAY be notified of this notice with a specific method
(for example, by sending an e-mail message to a mailbox).
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Security Considerations</span>
Refer to <a href="#section-3.1">Section 3.1</a> ("User Authorization") for authentication for an
offramp gateway. OpenPGP [<a href="#ref-17" title=""OpenPGP Message Format"">17</a>] [<a href="#ref-25" title=""MIME Security with OpenPGP"">25</a>] can be used to provide
authorization services instead of S/MIME. Refer to <a href="#section-4.1">Section 4.1</a>
("User Authorization") for authentication for an onramp gateway.
S/MIME and OpenPGP can also be used to encrypt a message. A signed
or encrypted message is protected while transported along the
network; however, when a message reaches an Internet Fax Gateway,
either onramp or offramp, this kind of protection cannot be applied
anymore. Here, security must rely on trusted operations of the
gateway itself. A gateway might have its own certificate/key to
improve security operations when sending Internet Faxes, but, as with
any gateway, it breaks the end-to-end security pattern of both S/MIME
and PGP.
Other security mechanisms, like IPsec [<a href="#ref-18" title=""Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol"">18</a>][19][<a href="#ref-20" title=""The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP"">20</a>][21][<a href="#ref-2" title=""IP Security Document Roadmap"">2</a>] or TLS [<a href="#ref-23" title=""Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions"">23</a>]
also do not ensure a secure gateway operation.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
Denial-of-service attacks are beyond the scope of this document.
Host compromise caused by flaws in the implementation is beyond the
scope of this document.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. References</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.1" href="#section-6.1">6.1</a>. Informative References</span>
[<a id="ref-1">1</a>] Masinter, L., "Terminology and Goals for Internet Fax", <a href="./rfc2542">RFC</a>
<a href="./rfc2542">2542</a>, March 1999.
[<a id="ref-2">2</a>] Thayer, R., Doraswamy, N., and R. Glenn, "IP Security Document
Roadmap", <a href="./rfc2411">RFC 2411</a>, November 1998.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2" href="#section-6.2">6.2</a>. Normative References</span>
[<a id="ref-3">3</a>] "Procedures for real-time Group 3 facsimile communication over
IP networks", ITU-T Recommendation T.38, June 1998.
[<a id="ref-4">4</a>] Toyoda, K., Ohno, H., Murai, J., and D. Wing, "A Simple Mode of
Facsimile Using Internet Mail", <a href="./rfc3965">RFC 3965</a>, December 2004.
[<a id="ref-5">5</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.
[<a id="ref-6">6</a>] "Procedures for document facsimile transmission in the general
switched telephone network", ITU-T Recommendation T.30, April
1999.
[<a id="ref-7">7</a>] Allocchio, C., "Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail",
<a href="./rfc3192">RFC 3192</a>, October 2001.
[<a id="ref-8">8</a>] Allocchio, C., "GSTN Address Element Extensions in E-mail
Services", <a href="./rfc2846">RFC 2846</a>, June 2000.
[<a id="ref-9">9</a>] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", <a href="./rfc3852">RFC 3852</a>,
July 2004.
[<a id="ref-10">10</a>] Rescorla, E., "Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method", <a href="./rfc2631">RFC 2631</a>,
June 1999.
[<a id="ref-11">11</a>] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
(S/MIME) Version 3.1 Certificate Handling", <a href="./rfc3850">RFC 3850</a>, July 2004.
[<a id="ref-12">12</a>] Ramsdell, B., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
(S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", <a href="./rfc3851">RFC 3851</a>, July
2004.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 10]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-11" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
[<a id="ref-13">13</a>] Hoffman, P., "Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME", <a href="./rfc2634">RFC 2634</a>,
June 1999.
[<a id="ref-14">14</a>] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", <a href="./rfc2822">RFC 2822</a>, April 2001.
[<a id="ref-15">15</a>] "Facsimile routing utilizing the subaddress", ITU recommendation
T.33, July 1996.
[<a id="ref-16">16</a>] Buckley, R., Venable, D., McIntyre, L., Parsons, G., and J.
Rafferty, "File Format for Internet Fax", <a href="./rfc3949">RFC 3949</a>, February
2005.
[<a id="ref-17">17</a>] Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H., and R. Thayer, "OpenPGP
Message Format", <a href="./rfc2440">RFC 2440</a>, November 1998.
[<a id="ref-18">18</a>] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", <a href="./rfc2401">RFC 2401</a>, November 1998.
[<a id="ref-19">19</a>] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header", <a href="./rfc2402">RFC 2402</a>,
November 1998.
[<a id="ref-20">20</a>] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition of
Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", <a href="./rfc3168">RFC 3168</a>,
September 2001.
[<a id="ref-21">21</a>] Piper, D., "The Internet IP Security Domain of Interpretation
for ISAKMP", <a href="./rfc2407">RFC 2407</a>, November 1998.
[<a id="ref-23">23</a>] Blake-Wilson, S., Nystrom, M., Hopwood, D., Mikkelsen, J., and
T. Wright, "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions", <a href="./rfc3546">RFC</a>
<a href="./rfc3546">3546</a>, June 2003.
[<a id="ref-24">24</a>] Mimura, K., Yokoyama, K., Satoh, T., Watanabe, K., and C.
Kanaide, "Guidelines for Optional Services for Internet Fax
Gateways", <a href="./rfc4161">RFC 4161</a>, August 2005.
[<a id="ref-25">25</a>] Elkins, M., Del Torto, D., Levien, R., and T. Roessler, "MIME
Security with OpenPGP", <a href="./rfc3156">RFC 3156</a>, August 2001.
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 11]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-12" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
Authors' Addresses
Katsuhiko Mimura
TOYO Communication Equipment CO., LTD.
2-1-1 Koyato, Samukawa-machi, Koza-gun
Kanagawa, Japan
Fax: +81 467 74 5743
EMail: mimu@miyabi-labo.net
Keiichi Yokoyama
TOYO Communication Equipment CO., LTD.
2-1-1 Koyato, Samukawa-machi, Koza-gun
Kanagawa, Japan
Fax: +81 467 74 5743
EMail: keiyoko@msn.com
Takahisa Satoh
TOYO Communication Equipment CO., LTD.
2-1-1 Koyato, Samukawa-machi, Koza-gun
Kanagawa, Japan
Fax: +81 467 74 5743
EMail: zsatou@t-ns.co.jp
Chie Kanaide
TOYO Communication Equipment CO., LTD.
2-1-1 Koyato, Samukawa-machi, Koza-gun
Kanagawa, Japan
Fax: +81 467 74 5743
EMail: icemilk77@yahoo.co.jp
Claudio Allocchio
Consortium GARR
Viale Palmiro Togliatti 1625
00155 Roma, Italy
Fax: +39 040 3758565
EMail: Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it
<span class="grey">Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 12]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-13" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4160">RFC 4160</a> Internet Fax Gateway Requirements August 2005</span>
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a>, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp79">BCP 79</a>.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/ipr">http://www.ietf.org/ipr</a>.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Mimura, et al. Informational [Page 13]
</pre>
|