Re: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02

Christer Holmberg <> Wed, 10 June 2015 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053C21A1BD9 for <>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 06:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kwez55Q747Ns for <>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 06:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E16AD1A1BEE for <>; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 06:05:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-f799f6d000000faf-44-557835fb351b
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 10.AF.04015.BF538755; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:04:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:04:59 +0200
From: Christer Holmberg <>
To: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
Thread-Index: AQHQoc9he4+R7vgLMUuxbp7avLo3752ltpKA
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:04:58 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre5v04pQg3uLLS3m33/GZNH38guT A5PHkiU/mTz6ZqxnDGCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4Mo4NfcoY8ETroq9X8+wNzDe4ehi5OSQEDCR 2Ht4HxuELSZx4d56IJuLQ0jgKKPEu1X/wBJCAosZJb6/Euhi5OBgE7CQ6P6nDRIWEdCU+Hjj HDOIzSxgKXF360kWEFtYwFFidd8xFogaJ4kprXeZIGwjiRnnJoHFWQRUJXZ++ANm8wr4SjQ3 P2KHWKUm8eD4DLC1nALqEkcapzGC2IxAt30/tYYJYpe4xK0n85kgbhaQWLLnPDOELSrx8vE/ VghbSeLHhkssEPV6EjemTmGDsLUlli18zQyxV1Di5MwnLBMYxWYhGTsLScssJC2zkLQsYGRZ xShanFqclJtuZKSXWpSZXFycn6eXl1qyiREYPQe3/DbYwfjyueMhRgEORiUeXsVZ5aFCrIll xZW5hxilOViUxHlnbM4LFRJITyxJzU5NLUgtii8qzUktPsTIxMEp1cBYw2jKIeui2r3+1OzK O4dtlhYL9esaLpSz6YmbwH/glvCZ5KTlZfGSBSaLk3Xerb38bx+Xa1/3gZ4Js4tfVp3Q654h nG75yd9JTaG06uu1Xf2r6x4avd576V/MhFc5t1p82yRrtrkY50fPdhEzkFo478/3yq7yQJGp Gjfm/19Qqa+qeVHAdpoSS3FGoqEWc1FxIgACifB9fwIAAA==
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Session-ID discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:05:13 -0000


I have read the draft. In general it looks ok, but I have a few questions on the requirements.

Q1 (editorial):

In REQ3, I suggest to place the "A "log me" marker SHOULD be removed at trust domain boundaries." sentence before the rest of the text.

Q2 (editorial/technical):

I don't understand REQ4, saying "SIP entities SHOULD log SIP requests or responses with a "log me" marker."

Also, in e.g. REQ6 it is then said that proxies MAY insert the marker, which seems to contradict.

Q3 (editorial/technical):

Regarding REQ5, does that also apply to UAs that do NOT support the mechanism? If so, I think that should be explicitly stated, because it will have big impact on the technical solution.



-----Original Message-----
From: insipid [] On Behalf Of Georg Mayer
Sent: 8. kesäkuuta 2015 12:42
Subject: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02


I finally managed to review draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02. I have no technical comments on it and support all the requirements therein. In my view the draft can progress as is.


insipid mailing list