Subject: RE: [Sip] Last Call: DHCPv6 Options for SIP Servers to Proposed Standard

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 14:48:55 -0700

> If you have a better approach for discovering the SIP proxy
controlling
> the firewall that you didn't know that you were behind (and I'd argue
> that Universal-Plug-and-Pray may not qualify), I'm, as Ross Perot
said,
> "all ears" . . .

Could it be that this "sip proxy controlling the firewall" is part of
the problem rather than part of the solution? It is certainly not part
of the IP architecture...

-- Christian Huitema

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 17:58:53 -0400

> of the IP architecture...

In theory, I agree with you Christian, in that the whole notion of a
visited proxy is silly; after all, when I'm in a hotel, I still connect
to the same mail server back in my "home", and not a local hotel mail
server which I discovered through DHCP. 

However, for communications services, local outbound proxies native to a
visited domain do and will exist for many reasons (for example, local
dialing plans, 911, local services, etc.), only one of which is firewall
traversal.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.            72 Eagle Rock Avenue
Chief Scientist                         First Floor
dynamicsoft                             East Hanover, NJ 07936
[email-masked]                 FAX: (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                  PH:  (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

---

From: Michael Thomas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:03:32 -0700 (PDT)

> of the IP architecture...

   <applause>

		Mike

---

From: "Dean Willis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:10:34 -0500

> Could it be that this "sip proxy controlling the firewall" is 
> part of the problem rather than part of the solution? It is 
> certainly not part of the IP architecture...
> 
> -- Christian Huitema

Yes, I'm sure that dealing with reality is out-of-scope for our
architecture. That's why we've been so successful at curtailing the
spread of NAT and firewall boxes and assuring interoperability when they
do spontaneously appear.

Your argument, while principaled, is consistent with the declaration
that since cars are approximately two horses wide (see "The Standard
that Wouldn't Die") we should be able to feed them grain, steer them
with reins and control their velocity with a buggy whip.

--
Dean