Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-audet-sip-sips-guidelines: sip and sips contactsinRegistrations

From: "Samir Srivastava" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:58:07 -0500

I think the idea of deprecating sips and addressing the behavior of this
feature like other mechanisms negotiated in SIP via headers or
parameters makes more sense.  The issue of what sip address gets
registered then is moot.

Then we could re-visit what it is we think we wanted to do wrt security
requests and validating that the request was in fact honored.

Security: header, options-tag: security  anyone???

SS>> This is the same I said earlier on this

"I am working on a proposal where UAC states what cipher suites it needs
in the path with the qValues in a header. UAC puts required
cipher-suites with Proxy-Require and Require option tags. If the UAC
desired level of security is not provided in the path, request is
rejected by the proxy which is reached with the desired level of
security. UAC can decide what to do if desired level of security is not
provided end to end. It proposes to include the ciphersuites in the via
header too for the UAS Knowledge. "

Thx
Samir

_______________________________________________
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