Subject: RE: [Sipping] autolearning of AORs

From: "Michael Procter" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:14:05 -0000

Juha Heinanen writes:
> no, but you make a false assumption and authentication username is the
> same as aor and that the user has only one aor.

Isn't this problem addressed by draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework?

My understanding of the Enrollment procedure suggests that you initially
subscribe using an AOR that may or may not be related to any of the AORs
that you end up with when the phone is fully configured.

I think that will give you the level of flexibility you want.

Michael

_______________________________________________
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

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:38:33 +0200

> Isn't this problem addressed by draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework?

that draft looks like an overkill to me.  if you look at example in
section 5.1, the user needs to provide a hostname to subscribe for
device profile:

The device prompts the user for the hostname to subscribe to for
       the device profile.

nothing like that should be needed.  username and password must be
enough.

-- juha

---

From: "Dale R. Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:59:06 -0500

> nothing like that should be needed.  username and password must be

I think a little more clarity is needed on the concept of "username"
before this discussion can be fruitful.

In your example, you give "[email-masked]" as an example of a username.
Now it seems that you intend for this to be used as the authentication
username, and probably that "tutpro.com" be used as the authentication
realm, but that it's not intended to be an AOR, nor as far as I can
tell, are you intending for "tutpro.com" to designate a proxy to which
to register to get the profiles from draft-ietf-sipping-config-
framework.

So it's not clear to me why there is an (apparent) domain part to the
"username".  Or conversely, if usernames have domain parts, why can't
that domain part be used as the place to subscribe for profiles.

There are also some complexities revolving around "what a user's AORs
are".  In an office setting, it's quite common for a user's desk phone
to have appearances for several AORs, some of which are "for" other
people.  So when that user's desk phone starts up, it needs to be
configured for all those line appearances.  But when the user is
traveling, maybe he doesn't want line appearances for those other AORs.
So it's not enough to know the identity of the person tending that UA to
determine all AORs that the UA should register for.

The only circumstance where you have multiple AORs for a single person
that can be managed without complexity is when all the AORs are fully
functionally equivalent.  And at that point, why not just permanently
forward all of them to one primary AOR, and then have your UA register
for the primary AOR?  And the configuration information needed for that
is user/domain/password...

Dale

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:33:49 +0200

> to register to get the profiles from draft-ietf-sipping-config-

yes.

 > that domain part be used as the place to subscribe for profiles.

yes, it can, but the whole business of subscribing for profiles sounds
far too complicated to me.

 > determine all AORs that the UA should register for.

the query would return all AORs that the user can register using the
given authentication username and password in the given domain.  in any
UA with a display, it would be easy to ask the user if all or only some
of these AORs would actually be installed in the UA.  in situations that
are complex with multiple roles, perhaps your profile subscription stuff
would be fine.  it just is too much for the common case.

 > is user/domain/password...

that would work in some cases, but i have some operator customers that
only like to see phone number style AORs in the phones.

-- juha