Re: B2B-UA's provide an unsolveable identity problem (was RE: submission of a new I-D: "Dialog Event foRIdentityVErification")
Dean Willis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:30 AM, Victor Pascual Ávila wrote: >> 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. > > A B2BUA is a man-in-the-middle, there's no feasible end-to-end > scenario here. > One might argue that we could define a "standard B2BUA function for optimal transparency". We would then add "Considerations at the Standard B2BUA" into every SIP extension. Would this change what SBCs do to make them application transparent? I rather doubt it. My sense is that the SBCs do what they do for reasons that are not dictated by our specifications, but from the valid or invalid perceptions of network operators and the business decisions they make in response to those perceptions. We can tell them that not beating their heads on the wall will reduce their cranial pain, but it is entirely possible that they're beating their heads because they enjoy it, feel that it will scare away the bogeyman, are using it to distract themselves from other self- inflicted wounds, don't have anything better to do with their money, or have found that ritual head-beating sedates the liability vultures and auditing zombies. Happy Halloween! -- Dean _______________________________________________ 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