Subject: [Sipping] draft-schulzrinne-sipping-id-relationships

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:30:27 -0400

One additional remark on the spam issue and the draft in general:

It was suggested that one would use presence for admitting IMs and 
calls. While this is useful for some cases, I don't think this is a 
replacement in all cases:

- My address book of people that I have sent email to (and would be 
willing to receive calls from) contains several thousand addresses. I'm 
unlikely to subscribe to all of these or have all of these subscribe to 
me - I'm not interested in revealing my availability status to all of 
them in real time (and almost none of them would care, given that they 
may most likely never call me).

- There's the bootstrap problem: If somebody subscribes to me, how would 
I recognize them? Given no other context or other external "this is a 
good guy" cert, I'd look at their name and SIP AOR. Since I haven't seen 
their SIP identifier, I'd likely say "oh, this is [email-masked]; 
that's the same alice that I have sent email to/received email from".

This equivalency is never perfect, but this is all about improving the 
odds, not perfection.

In a separate context, Hannes mentioned some general security multi-path 
techniques that use a variation of this idea. (There's a technical term 
for this that escapes me here.)

A number of people indicated support for this type of specification as 
being useful as a tool to convince local admins to "do the right thing". 
Apparently, some admins have pulled the "joe's VoIP contract has 
expired, so let me re-assign that ID [even though it's still a valid 
email address". Having a clue-by-four likely won't be a cure-all for 
these, but I've found that pointing to a neutral third party does carry 
weight with local admins.

I'd appreciate advice on how to proceed. There are probably at least 
three meta-issues:

- Is the information in the draft wrong or shouldn't be recommended?

- Should there be an RFC recommending them?

- If yes, is an individual+WG review draft a viable approach, given the 
low complexity of the draft?

Henning

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