Subject: [martini] New Version of GIN

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:05:55 -0500

I have produced a new version of GIN that I beleive addresses most of 
the tickets that had been opened (with only three exceptions, described 
below):

   http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-martini-gin-01.txt

Changes from -00 are here:

   http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-martini-gin-01.txt

This version includes a proposed resolution to the "user=phone" issue, 
based on the discussions in Anaheim. I have, however, left the ticket 
open, as there has been ongoing discussion after Anaheim that indicates 
that we may not yet have concensus in this area. The text currently in 
section 5 is my attempt to provide text for further crafting:

    Although it is not a special case from a protocol perspective,
    implementors are reminded that this behavior includes any "user"
    parameter on the URI.  For example, if the registering PBX requires
    incoming messages to include a "user=phone" parameter on their
    Request-URI, it will include "user=phone" on the URI in the "Contact"
    header field of its registration.  Because of the requirement on the
    SSP to copy parameters into the location service, it will appear on
    any Request-URIs that are retargeted to the PBX based on that
    registration.  Conversely, if the registering PBX does not include a
    "user=phone" parameter, any SSP using the procedures defined in this
    document would not be at liberty to include one on the Request-URI.

Comments and suggestions for improvements are welcome.

The other two open issues entail the security implications of multiple 
users being registered with a single REGISTER request, and an analysis 
of the Outbound mechanism as it interacts with GIN. The first one is 
waiting on the second, which is in turn waiting on a qualified volunteer 
to perform the analysis.

Aside from these three open tickets, I am aware of no constructive 
requests for changes to the document. Participants who feel otherwise 
should feel free to register their issues in the tracker.

/a

---

From: "Elwell, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:38:19 +0200

Adam,

Thanks, this is looking good, and addresses any tracker issues I have raised to date. See below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Adam Roach
> Sent: 20 April 2010 00:06
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [martini] New Version of GIN
> 
[JRE] "This behaviour" needs to be clarified, since the text is now separated from the text on parameter handling by a large paragraph on single number registrations. Or alternatively reverse the order of the two parameters.

John

> _______________________________________________
> martini mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini
>