Re: B2B-UA's provide an unsolveable identity problem (was RE: submission of a new I-D: "Dialog Event foRIdentityVErification")

Yes, you are right, there are "end-to-end" solutions.
I take back the comment about unsolveable.
 
My comments were a bit extreme but I guess I was trying to say you are always at the mercy of the B2BUA.
As we know, the problems with B2BUAs are not because of problems with UA-to-UA SIP but with the fields and bodies that B2BUA's change.  So, for me, it should be the B2BUA makers who fix those problems.
 
So, in conclusion I would prefer that UA-to-UA works first.
 
>>designed solution.  Spam won't wait for the IETF.

Agreed.  And finding a solution will take even longer if we have to consider B2BUAs.
 
Regards,
Attila
 
PS Don't get me wrong, I don't hate B2BUA's, I just think they should fix their own issues.
 

________________________________

From: Dan Wing [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Fri 31/10/2008 16:21
To: Attila Sipos; 'Juha Heinanen'; 'Elwell, John'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: B2B-UA's provide an unsolveable identity problem (was RE: [Sip] submission of a new I-D: "Dialog Event foRIdentityVErification")



B2BUAs, and SBCs, need to provide their features to their
customers (service providers), and can *also* provide end-to-
end identity.  The two requirements are not mutually exclusive,
and I don't understand what causes that argument to persist. 
Please talk to your favorite SBC vendor and ask them.

And when SIP spam becomes a problem (do you doubt it will?)
it will be much easier if we have a specification that can
solve the problem -- otherwise, vendors will be rushed to
create something that may not work as well as an IETF-
designed solution.  Spam won't wait for the IETF.

-d



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Attila Sipos [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 12:34 AM
> To: Juha Heinanen; Elwell, John
> Cc: [email protected]; Dan Wing
> Subject: B2B-UA's provide an unsolveable identity problem
> (was RE: [Sip] submission of a new I-D: "Dialog Event
> foRIdentityVErification")
>
> >>i strongly disagree.  b2bua is just an ua.  if you you
> build or deploy
> >>such boxes, it is your headache, not sip wg's.
>
> I agree with Juha here.
>
> Every attempt at fixing identity problems (and they have been clever
> solutions) has been hindered with the "but it won't work with B2BUAs"
> argument.
>
> The problem is not "it won't work with B2BUAs" - the  problem is that
> B2BUA identity and security problems are unsolveable anyway. A B2BUA
> cannot be forced to do anything because even if you said "it must do
> this and that", a B2BUA can do what it wants anyway (I'm sure
> we've all
> seen this).  Even if B2BUAs agreed to do certain things, one would
> always enf up with something else that gets B2B'ed.
>
> It is no different to trying to solve the problem of 2
> telephones taped
> together.
>
> You can only trust things up to a certain boundary.  And the
> boundaries
> of SIP are the UAs.  The best that SIP can do is to control
> what happens
> between a UA and another UA (and proxies in between) and that's it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Attila
>
>
> 
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Juha Heinanen
> Sent: 31 October 2008 06:31
> To: Elwell, John
> Cc: [email protected]; Dan Wing
> Subject: Re: [Sip] submission of a new I-D: "Dialog Event
> foRIdentityVErification"
>
> Elwell, John writes:
>
>  > > I support draft-kuthan-sip-derive-00, and hope the WG
> can devote  >
> > time and energy to improving and standardizing it to work well  > >
> across a variety of networks.
>  > [JRE] I agree. This must include networks that contain B2BUAs/SBCs.
>
> i strongly disagree.  b2bua is just an ua.  if you you build or deploy
> such boxes, it is your headache, not sip wg's.  it is enough that this
> work is based on rfc3261 components.
>
> -- juha
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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