Subject: [Sipping] draft-elwell-sipping-update-pai-02

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:36:38 -0800

It would probably be worth some time talking about why 3325 is  
informational and what the standard track alternatives are. I would  
also want to think about what the impacts this change had on  
malicious call trace which was one of the things 3325 was created for.

Cullen <with my individual contributor hat on>

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: "Elwell, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:15:18 +0000

Cullen,

I am not sure it has any impact on malicious call trace. The operation
of PAI in an INVITE request is not changed by this proposal.

Considering the standards track alternative, I can bring that up at the
meeting. I had mixed responses from one or two people I talked to
privately. I think the basic concern was that the security properties of
PAI would not pass the test for adoption as standards track. On the
other hand, given that PAI is part of "core SIP", it would make some
sense for it to be standards track.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: 30 November 2007 03:37
> To: sipping
> Subject: [Sipping] draft-elwell-sipping-update-pai-02
> 
>