[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sip] RE: TLS meaning
Francois Audet wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Thomas [mailto:mat at cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 4:20 PM
To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055)
Cc: IETF SIP List
Subject: Re: [Sip] RE: TLS meaning
Francois Audet wrote:
Please calm down.
Here is one simple scenario.
I deploy an Enteprise SIP network. I install 10 SIP proxies
accross the
Corporate Network. All the proxies are certified to properly
implement
SIPS. All the phones are also certified to implement SIPS
properly. I
know, because I am responsible for the network.
An end user can call another end-user within that network with the
certitude that if sips is used, it will be secured end-to-end.
How about an example when it's not all within the same
administrative entity. How abouts some examples that
resemble, oh say, the mail system.
These have always been where my concerns are. Within my own
domain, I don't need SIPS; I can do that by executive fiat.
In that case, if you don't have trust with them, then don't use
sips. As simple as that.
Yes you need sips in your own domain, because some devices support TLS,
others don't. Some users want to be addressed securily, others don't.
No. I do not require a signaling element to decide whether to route via
SIP/TLS or just SIP. I can just as easily statically provision it. Or I can
try it on a SIP/TLS listener port first. Or any other way to do the same
thing.
In any case, you didn't respond to my point that SIPS is not end to end
security. That's just false on its face, and the seeming fact that you don't
get the difference is the tip of a very problematic iceberg.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip