Re: draft-kuthan-sip-derive
Dean Willis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Nov 17, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Adam Roach wrote: > On 11/17/08 7:40 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: >> Or you could pick something else to use for verification. > > Such as...? > The as-yet-undocumented Globally Unique Call Control Identifier, or "GUCCI" . . . It's just like the Call-ID, but SBC's don't change it (yet) because they don't about it (yet). Of course, that will change once the RFC is published and some crazed operator beats their SBC vendor into implementing a GUCCI updating algorithm. I predict that this "feature" will be managed under the codename "Paris spring fashion show", but that's not important right now. What IS important is that we understand that no such feature can be made to work with an SBC that is actively disrupting it. We already wrote specs that said "Don't do this", and they did it anyhow, so why should we expect them to cooperate the next time? Rational or not, there are reasons for most of this behavior. -- 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