Re: [Insipid] Session-ID : user or server controlled

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Tue, 27 March 2012 16:04 UTC

Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F36921E80AB for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.471
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.471 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.128, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U6CHeHINUTAY for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335F921E8040 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q2RG4WuA011264 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:04:33 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1332864274; bh=J3KAX2Xyd3mRCtswSCouJSem67u1IBVnmqE+yq/8zFI=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=JZVtUzrtgAXOHv4xuufM6P2/sbzVUqTJ9uOboaatD/Bh2KqEQqsOmTdWWzES7UJLl ojCVsySUS/1bgrWgTc9ZKEULkZz2oV/q+JjnmgJkHkqK5pNWc9+XvNMj0gqO47kF3P 6n1RSWSP4a9lrMMbPbnkzjWR92g33i5z/Py9laNs=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: "'Hutton, Andrew'" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>, 'Hadriel Kaplan' <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>, "'Olle E. Johansson'" <oej@edvina.net>
References: <06343E8A-D16C-41EF-ACA9-89090A7DD6A1@edvina.net> <053f01cd0b70$136c26b0$3a447410$@packetizer.com> <245F6091-7D29-400C-8C10-BD1ABB27BE02@edvina.net> <C9299C8B-ADD8-4AB1-BA04-141E6DAE267F@acmepacket.com> <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E31296BC68CA@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
In-Reply-To: <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E31296BC68CA@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:04:35 -0400
Message-ID: <00aa01cd0c33$4ed527b0$ec7f7710$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHl9oeKoqc7qsKpduOGWiEHsS5KxQHnaxoAAaDTJKsBeKZ9QAHX7L88lhWySVA=
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: insipid@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Session-ID : user or server controlled
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Session-ID discussion list <insipid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/insipid>
List-Post: <mailto:insipid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:04:38 -0000

It seems there is general agreement with that point.  We had inserted it
into the requirements as REQ7, but we had not covered that in
draft-jones-insipid-session-id.  We should have, though.  Indeed, I expect
that phones connected to a PBX may or may not generate a UUID (depending on
the date of their firmware) to generate these UUIDs, but we would certainly
want the network to benefit from being able to track a session at least to
the PBX, if not to the phone.

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: insipid-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:insipid-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Hutton, Andrew
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:31 AM
> To: Hadriel Kaplan; Olle E. Johansson
> Cc: Paul E. Jones; <insipid@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Insipid] Session-ID : user or server controlled
> 
> I am thinking that we also need to consider 3PCC scenarios in which the
> B2BUA effectively initiates the two legs in this case the B2BUA is going
> to generate the session-id when it generates the initial INVITE request.
> 
> Regards
> Andy
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: insipid-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:insipid-bounces@ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of Hadriel Kaplan
> > Sent: 26 March 2012 20:10
> > To: Olle E. Johansson
> > Cc: Paul E. Jones; <insipid@ietf.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Insipid] Session-ID : user or server controlled
> >
> >
> > [as an individual]
> >
> > I don't see it in draft-jones-insipid-session-id-00 yet, but draft-
> > kaplan-dispatch-session-id-03 had the notion that a B2BUA could
> > generate a Session-ID if none was in the received request.  This was
> > to provide a migration path for cases where the originating UAC
> > (softphone, gateway, whatever) did not yet support Session-ID and thus
> > did not generate it itself. (and likewise the B2BUA inserts it in the
> > response if the UAS did not support Session-ID and did not reflect it
> > in its responses)
> >
> > -hadriel
> >
> > On Mar 26, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 26 mar 2012 kl. 18:47 skrev Paul E. Jones:
> > >
> > >> Coming in from the ISDN, that GW is the originating user agent as
> > far as SIP
> > >> is concerned.  So, I think that's a reasonable place for the
> > Session-ID UUID
> > >> to be created for one end.
> > > But that is totally outside of my control. I will have to wait to a
> > majority of the larger SIP providers in Europe support this then...
> > > Not a solution, sorry. In this application, I just need to manage it
> > from the man-in-the-middle-box.
> > >
> > > /O
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Paul
> > >>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: insipid-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:insipid-bounces@ietf.org]
> > >>> On
> > Behalf
> > >>> Of Olle E. Johansson
> > >>> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:46 AM
> > >>> To: insipid@ietf.org
> > >>> Subject: [Insipid] Session-ID : user or server controlled
> > >>>
> > >>> In the meeting today, I realized that we're talking about two very
> > >>> different use cases:
> > >>>
> > >>> - A user controlled session ID like in the draft
> > >>> - A server controlled session ID
> > >>>
> > >>> For call center applications, I need a server controlled session
> > >>> ID
> > I want
> > >>> to slap on a call coming in from the ISDN and keep as it traverses
> > several
> > >>> b2buas. At that point I don't even know which "user" that will be
> > an
> > >>> endpoint in the call and I don't really care.
> > >>>
> > >>> Just to confuse a little bit more, if needed.
> > >>>
> > >>> /O
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> insipid mailing list
> > >>> insipid@ietf.org
> > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> insipid mailing list
> > >> insipid@ietf.org
> > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid
> > >
> > > ---
> > > * Olle E Johansson - oej@edvina.net
> > > * Cell phone +46 70 593 68 51, Office +46 8 96 40 20, Sweden
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > insipid mailing list
> > > insipid@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > insipid mailing list
> > insipid@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid
> _______________________________________________
> insipid mailing list
> insipid@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid