Notes from conference call on identity

2008-12-16, 15.30-16.45 GMT

Chair: Keith Drage.

Participants: Adam Uzelac, Hannes Tschofenig, Kai Fischer, Dan York,
Jonathan Rosenberg, Hadriel Kaplan, Victor Pascual Avila.

Background:
See attached emails from Keith.

Topics to discuss:
- Can we get the problem we are trying to solve into a single I-D?
- Is there any consolidation or elimination with current drafts that we
can usefully do at present?

Discussion:
Need to convince the ADs of what the problem is.

How do we convey a more secure version of caller ID given the problem of
middleboxes?

Hannes: The world uses PAI today and people are happy, that is the
present business model. So this isn't a problem that needs solving right
now.

Other opinions: On the other hand we don't have interconnect yet, and
when we do we will need stronger mechanisms. So a chicken and egg
situation.

Question of what relates to identity, e.g., media.

Hannes: Need to capture economic and commercial side-effects, not just
technical issues.

Adam: Carriers are largely used just for PSTN access today, but as
carrier use extends, and as enterprises start wanting the caller ID
delivered e2e, then the problem will start to hit carriers.

Hadriel: This is a problem that I would like to fix before it arises and
hits the press. Also the solution will take a long time to standardise
and then to deploy.

Dan: We need a plan, and need to work on a solution, else it will
seriously impact the deployment of SIP.

Chair: Which of the present drafts would be the best starting point for
capturing problem statement?

Agreed to take the e2e-identity-important draft from John as the
starting point. Should be more emphasis on the fact that certain actions
of middleboxes are legitimate and the solutions needs to work still in
these environments. Should ensure all problem statement aspects are
captured (including those from the various other drafts), but leaving
out those aspects that are better left in the other drafts. Focus only
on the problem and strip out any solution stuff. Use the problem
statement to identify requirements, which for now can perhaps be left as
an appendix. Dan and Adam will help John to develop this draft.
Concerning Hannes' concern, the identified requirements should say what
is urgent and what is not urgent to fix.

Victor: Unclear at present whether this is a single problem with a
single set of requirements, or perhaps two problems (one of which is
addressed by DERIVE). Agreed DERIVE supporters should contribute into
the problem statement / requirements work.

There as no opinion on whether anything from the SAML draft needs to go
into the discussion.

The dates proposed by Keith for further calls (13th January, 27th
January, 17th February) at 15.30 GMT were confirmed. Duration will be 1
hour.

Thoughts on what should/should not be in the next revision of
e2e-identity-important should be sent to John, Adam, Dan and others by
6th January, so that a proposed plan for the next revision can be
brought to the call on 13th January.

For ongoing email communication, use the list of invitees for
communication within the design team, but anything of wider impact use
the SIP list.

John

_______________________________________________
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