- 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