Re: [dispatch] Identity Adhoc - Nov 9th: Notes available

["Bernard Aboba" <[e-mail]>]

Dean said:

 

"People do highly dubious stuff all the time; they have unprotected sex, 

they jump out of perfectly good airplanes, they vote for Obama, they try 

for a single-handed Atlantic crossing in a 6 meter sailboat with no 

preparation, they try to implement RAI specifications from the RFC 

without parallel testing against existing systems, and so on.

 

The question is: Should we take the human urge to engage in highly 

dubious practies like traffic steering into account when we write an 

identity spec? If so, at what level of  dubiousness (or dubyaness, for 

the left-leaning) do we draw the line?"

 

[BA]   A key question to answer is whether SIP Identity is for general
purpose use or not:

 

a)      If it is not for general purpose use, then the analysis (and
applicability statement)

can focus solely on those use cases for which it is appropriate, and the

"dubious" cases can be noted as out of scope.   

 

b)      If the intent is to provide a facility for general purpose use, then
enabling

use in commonly encountered situations is a requirement, regardless of how

"dubious" they might be.