Re: [Sip] Alternative SIP Identity Approach (was re: Thoughts on SIP Identity)

["Dan Wing" <dwing at cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Roach [mailto:adam at nostrum.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:51 PM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: 'Dean Willis'; 'SIP IETF'; 'Adam Uzelac'
> Subject: Re: [Sip] Alternative SIP Identity Approach (was re: 
> Thoughts on SIP Identity)
> 
> On 7/31/08 2:38 PM, Dan Wing wrote:
> >> Here's the problem... if I trust a B2BUA, it doesn't 
> necessarily mean 
> >> that I'll trust everything it trusts. If Bob's UA is going 
> to make an 
> >> informed choice, we need it to be able to examine a chain of 
> >> custody for the identity, at the very least.
> >>     
> >
> > The chain would be good, but I would be happy with the first link: 
> > who (claims to have) injected the message into the SIP 
> network.  Even
> > if the message transited over some itty-bitty ITSP in a 
> country I had
> > never heard of, it wouldn't matter if I could verify the identity of
> > who injected the message into the SIP 'cloud'.
> >   
> 
> Sorry, I was a bit unclear. When I talk about this "chain of 
> custody," I 
> mean everything that has performed an action that would invalidate a 
> 4474 signature; everything that has had to re-sign something. 
> Those are 
> the actions that require a level of trust. As long as the ITSP you 
> mention doesn't change 4474-protected fields, I don't care 
> who they are.

Oh, so something like:  "The original list of codecs was G.729,G.711" and to
convey it in such a way that I could re-insert G.729 and validate the original
4474 signature?  And something like "The original m/c line was 1.2.3.4/5678"?

-d

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip