Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 2 - PSTN?

[Peter Musgrave <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I think the use of PSTN reachability is central to ViPR and it's
value. I agree there will be other ways of authenticating and that
over time they may displace ViPR but I think PSTN reachability will be
around for a long time. I think it is the lowest-common denominator
and avoids things like trying to interface to databases of PSTN
numbers and all the assorted standards and security issues that
entails.

I see this as a temporary solution in the same way that NAT traversal
is a temporary solution :-)

Perhaps we should make it clear in the charter that the work requires
that a node using ViPR have the ability to make and receive PSTN calls
(or interface to something that does)?

I think general authentication without using PSTN reachability is a
great idea - but I think that is a far larger and more complex issue.
IIUC ViPR exists to circumvent that issue and provide a shorter term,
standards-based, pragmatic solution. I think the more general problem
would need a charter unto itself.

Peter Musgrave

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Roni Even <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I read the charter and the listed drafts. I have no problem with the first
> two paragraph of the charter
>
> "There are two globally deployed address spaces for communications that more
> than a billion people use on a daily basis. They are phone numbers and DNS
> rooted address such as web servers and email addresses. The inter-domain
> signaling design of SIP is primarily designed for email style addresses yet
> a large percentage of SIP deployments mostly use phone numbers for
> identifying users. The goal of this working group is to enable inter-domains
> communications over the internet, using protocol such as SIP, while still
> allowing people to use phone numbers to identify the person they wish to
> communicate with.
>
> The VIPR WG will address this problem by developing a peer to peer based
> approach to finding domains that claim to be responsible for a given phone
> number and validation protocols to ensure a reasonable likelihood that a
> given domain actually is responsible for the phone number."
>
> I have a concern about using PSTN infrastructure for the reachability. My
> understanding so far was that SIP is trying to provide a new way for end to
> end communication that will replace the existing circuit switch
> infrastructure. This proposal says that the way to achieve end to end
> connectivity requires to have an end to end PSTN frastructure.
>
> The third paragraph is talking about validation using PSTN calls. I think
> that we can look at validation of number ownership but should say that
> requiring PSTN calls to do it is not the recommended approach. This will
> allow managing of PSTN numbers not in the scope of PSTN infrastructure. Even
> the PSTN network is using external protocol like SS7 to route calls using
> databases for achieving reachability so why not say we can use similar
> infrastructure that will be IP based.
>
> I can understand this as a temporary solution but not as a standard
> developed by the IETF.
>
>
>  Thanks
>
> Roni Even
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>