Re: scope of derive

I actually don't think that is the case. My recollection, could be  
very wrong, what that SER edits outbound, not inbound SDP. That said,  
if SER editing my inbound SDP, it would check the signature before  
doing so, and then go and execute my black list that rejected calls at  
2 am form people other than a certain set, then send the call down to  
me. Once again, I not getting what is broken in this case.

On Dec 10, 2008, at 6:20 PM, Dean Willis wrote:

>
> On Dec 10, 2008, at 6:48 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> >>
> >
> > Jiri, I would like to make sure I understand exactly what is broken
> > here. So, say some B2BUA that implements 4474, like SER is running
> > at iptel.org. And I have an account, say [email protected]. Now my
> > phone is registered and sends an INVITE to SER with the From set  
> to "[email protected]
> > ". My understanding is SER edits the SDP then does the 4474
> > signature and sends it on.
> >
> > So in the case you are discussing here, what exactly is broken that
> > stops iptel.org from both editing SDP and doing 4474?
> >
>
> I'm not Jiȓi, but:
>
> The INVITE hits the SER proxy at the terminating domain, say FWD,
> which then rewrites the SDP and sends it on. The originating signature
> is now broken. Or the FWD proxy rewrites the signature, and the cert
> doesn't match the domain. Broken.
>
>
> --
> 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