Re: scope of derive

Dean Willis wrote:
> 
> On Dec 8, 2008, at 1:22 PM, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
> 
>> Dean Willis wrote:
>>> On Dec 8, 2008, at 8:49 AM, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
>>>> Elwell, John wrote:
>>>>> [JRE] The number of negatives will diminish, true, but it will never
>>>>> approach zero, because there will always be negative cases arising 
>>>>> from
>>>>> forking, call forwarding, problematic B2BUAs, etc..
>>>>
>>>> indeed.
>>>>
>>>>> So it is a question
>>>>> whether it will get sufficiently close to zero that the odd false
>>>>> negative can safely be ignored. I am rather doubtful.
>>>>
>>>> The question remains: why would like to worry about the negative case
>>>> when we know it has zero information value?? I cannot conceive anyone
>>>> would like to use such non-information and I don't see the point in
>>>> studying it then.
>>> How would DERIVE change the behavior of the user in the positive case?
>>
>> That's a policy thing. Perhaps (as an example) increase a call atempt 
>> score
>> beyond a threshold that will prevent the call from falling in voicemail.
>>
>>> How would DERIVE change the behavior of the user in the negative case?
>>
>> not at all.
>>
> 
> Well, the Security area wonks are going to want us to have a threat 
> assessment. What is the risk? In what scenarios does it occur? What are 
> the consequences?
> 
> Given the threat assessment, we then need to understand how the solution 
> impacts that threat. What are the possible ranges of policy? What is the 
> recommended policy? How does it impact behavior in a system that uses 
> this solution?

Thanks, that's helpful, we will try to address it in -01. Hadriel's list
was excellent input too.

-jiri


> 
> -- 
> 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