Re: Comment on DERIVE and B2BUAs

> El Miércoles, 29 de Octubre de 2008, Dan Wing escribió:
> > > Would the SBC not have to handle the SUBSCRIBE request 
> locally? After
> > > all, since it is a terminal UA for the call, it also knows
> > > about all the
> > > dialog states. The end-user UA would never even see the SUBSCRIBE.
> >
> > If that's a problem, just use some different method that goes end to
> > end.  The always-loved INFO comes to mind.
> 
> Anyway, you need to carry in the INFO body (or headers) data 
> about the current 
> dialog, but this data changes in both legs of the B2BUA, so 
> it will fail.
> It's exactly the same case as if the SUBSCRIBE is "forwarded" 
> between B2BUA 
> legs without replacing the dialog data (from leg B to leg A).

And that is why there are two proposals that use something that
can't change -- the certificate fingerprint of the endpoint:

  draft-fischer-sip-e2e-sec-media (expired)
  draft-wing-sip-identity-media (expired)

They expired due to lack of interest.


Let's talk about the meta-issue:  do we want assurance of a 
"From:" over SBCs?  If so, let us please convince the ADs 
in Minneapolis and let us please get a new SIP milestone.

-d

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