[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sip] Ready for WGLC on SIPS draft? Any last thoughtsontransport=tls?

I am strongly against it. If there are any issues that are currently being solved using transport=tls (in practice), they should be solved in a different way.

Regards,
Jeroen

Francois Audet wrote: 
Normally, I would agree with you. But transport=tls is so
intertwined with SIPS that I'd rather fix both at the same time.

What I haven't heard is any voice strongly being against the
re-instatement of transport=tls (except perhaps myself, but I don't
care anymore: just want to move on).

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat at cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 16:17
To: Gilad Shaham
Cc: Robert Sparks; Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); SIP IETF; Dean
Willis Subject: Re: [Sip] Ready for WGLC on SIPS draft? Any last
thoughts ontransport=tls?

Jumping in. I just happened to pick Gilad's message to respond to.

I've only been loosely following this discussion. But it
seems to me that this transport=tls issue is a distraction
from finishing the sips draft. Why does the sips draft have
any responsibility for addressing this issue?

I think it would be better to let the sips draft be finished
and then move on to addressing all of the (many) important
security issues that sips doesn't solve, as a separate effort.


_______________________________________________
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 



_______________________________________________
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