Subject: [Sipping] privacy-04

From: Flemming Andreasen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:01:43 -0500

Greetings

Over the last month or so, we've had some good discussions about the
privacy-03 draft (draft-ietf-sip-privacy-03.txt). Based on the
discussions, I have noted consensus on the following:

- Untrusted UAs may provide a Remote-Party-Id header to their proxy in
order to indicate a desired Remote-Party-Id they wish to be known under.
This is needed for the case where there may be multiple Remote-Party-Ids
associated with the UA (or the user using the UA) and the UA (or user)
has a preference as to which one is to be used. Separate UA (or user)
authentication, which is outside the scope of the privacy draft, will
still be required.

- The Anonymity header will be removed in anticipation of a more general
routing/service invocation solution to this problem. The issue of IP
address will still be described though.

- The transitive trust model currently described in privacy-03 will
remain unmodified. Furthermore, the Remote-Party-Id header will remain
unsigned. An applicability statement explaining the environments in
which the solution can be used and the limitations associated with it
will be included.

- Grammar fixes:
    a) Remote-Party-ID and RPID-Privacy need to be on list form
    b) RPID-Privacy values should not start with semi-colon.

If you believe the above does not reflect consensus, or if I omitted
something in the above list, please let me know as soon as possible.
Otherwise, the above will be reflected in privacy-04.

Thanks

            Flemming
--
Flemming Andreasen
Cisco Systems

_______________________________________________
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