Subject: [siprec] About the "Architecture" ppt:

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:26:08 +0800

I think siprec work has some resemblance with LI(Lawful Interception) work 
in telecom industry.

And the e2e mode flow, B2BUA mode flow mentioned in the "Architecture ppt" 
are quit like the flow of LI signal flows in LI which defined by ETSI and 
3GPP.

So, I guess equipment manufacturer for LI may be interested in siprec(by 
myself, I am).

Best Regards,

Gao

===================================
 Zip    : 210012
 Tel    : 87211
 Tel2   :(+86)-025-52877211
 e_mail : [email-masked]
===================================

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

---

From: "Elwell, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:29:51 +0100

There is a significant difference between LI and SIPREC. SIPREC is specifically for the case where the user is voluntarily having the session recorded or is at least aware of the session being recorded. It is my understanding that LI requires recording in secret, which is specifically outside the scope of SIPREC. If some of the SIPREC results happen to be reusable for LI, fine, but that is not the goal of SIPREC.

John

________________________________
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: 23 March 2010 12:26
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [siprec] About the "Architecture" ppt:

I think siprec work has some resemblance with LI(Lawful Interception) work in telecom industry.

And the e2e mode flow, B2BUA mode flow mentioned in the "Architecture ppt" are quit like the flow of LI signal flows in LI which defined by ETSI and 3GPP.

So, I guess equipment manufacturer for LI may be interested in siprec(by myself, I am).

Best Regards,

Gao

---

From: Brian Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:38:02 -0400

<as chair>
Please read RFC2804, which is highlighted in our charter.  LI could
certainly use mechanisms defined in this work.  However, we cannot accept
any requirements, or describe any mechanisms that would only be used for LI.

Brian

On 3/23/10 3:26 PM, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> And the e2e mode flow, B2BUA mode flow mentioned in the "Architecture ppt" are
> quit like the flow of LI signal flows in LI which defined by ETSI and 3GPP.
> 
> ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is
> solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is
> confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are
> not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If
> you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the
> message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender.
> _______________________________________________
> siprec mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/siprec

---

From: Igor Faynberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:18:42 -0400

Precisely!

Igor

Elwell, John wrote:
> There is a significant difference between LI and SIPREC. SIPREC is 
> specifically for the case where the user is voluntarily having the 
> session recorded or is at least aware of the session being recorded. 
> It is my understanding that LI requires recording in secret, which is 
> specifically outside the scope of SIPREC....

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 05:19:46 +0800

Your understanding about LI is right. But what I mean is about the signal 
flow and equipment's resemblance.

And I have no doubt about siprec's charter.

Gao

"Elwell, John" <[email-masked]> 
2010-03-24 04:29

收件人
"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" 
<[email-masked]>
抄送

主题
RE: [siprec] About the "Architecture" ppt:

There is a significant difference between LI and SIPREC. SIPREC is 
specifically for the case where the user is voluntarily having the session 
recorded or is at least aware of the session being recorded. It is my 
understanding that LI requires recording in secret, which is specifically 
outside the scope of SIPREC. If some of the SIPREC results happen to be 
reusable for LI, fine, but that is not the goal of SIPREC.
 
John

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf 
Of [email-masked]
Sent: 23 March 2010 12:26
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [siprec] About the "Architecture" ppt:

Best Regards, 

Gao 

===================================
Zip    : 210012
Tel    : 87211
Tel2   :(+86)-025-52877211
e_mail : [email-masked]
===================================
--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is 
solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is 
confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and 
are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to 
others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. 
If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of 
the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the 
individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam 
system.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 05:32:49 +0800

Gao

收件人

主题

John

Best Regards, 

Gao

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 05:49:15 +0800

I understand your charter'exclusion for LI, while considering RFC2804. 

I just feel that:
1. As the signal flow's resemblance, equipment manufacturer for LI may be 
potential manufacturer for siprec equipment.
2. some definiton in siprec can be used in LI, such as metadata for the 
content is useful for 3GPP's LI definition.

Gao

Brian Rosen <[email-masked]> 
2010-03-24 04:38

收件人
<[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
抄送

主题
Re: [siprec] About the "Architecture" ppt:

<as chair>
Please read RFC2804, which is highlighted in our charter.  LI could
certainly use mechanisms defined in this work.  However, we cannot accept
any requirements, or describe any mechanisms that would only be used for 
LI.

Brian

On 3/23/10 3:26 PM, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> 
> I think siprec work has some resemblance with LI(Lawful Interception) 
work in
> telecom industry.
system.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:44:09 +0800

I guess you misunderstood my intention.

I am OK with siprec and it's charter. I just see some potential 
re-usability about the equipment and protocol(such as metadata of 
content). Maybe it is too early for me to considering the re-usability. 

Gao 

Igor Faynberg <[email-masked]> 
2010-03-24 05:18
请答复 给
[email-masked]

收件人

Precisely!

Igor