[Insipid] MUST or SHOULD for Type 4 / 5 UUIDs?

Paul Giralt <pgiralt@cisco.com> Thu, 02 June 2016 04:00 UTC

Return-Path: <pgiralt@cisco.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 C768212D0E0 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B3s6QvXZ0elU for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6917212D0CB for <insipid@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=460; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464840028; x=1466049628; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date: to:mime-version; bh=1pawlk+H+iSa5q+jFoU2DKjkbhqZMN9EL3zaOhaLywE=; b=dlNx/H2XFWBfgI66h7+5afqcrRYU+vCrbK6PGaA9vWZaiK0NJlNCVEHy k3U3Houfv0BlasmJYrNPZHhs/D1qY8OK9S27KIMu5dfRFWA0B11NMiaGO o1zaQoGYt9kG65zYgCWwvzW7fMzMXOyvZYbgS7Ba+gZCZQhhV22uDM2c4 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D8AQDYrk9X/4gNJK1egzq5c4IPAQ2Be?= =?us-ascii?q?odGOBQBAQEBAQEBZSeEb4ELAiYCiSGgNY9ikR0MASSBAYUmgXcIh1qCNSuCLgW?= =?us-ascii?q?YN44ggVMBjUiPTB4BAUKCBhyBZyCLLgEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,404,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="280752521"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 02 Jun 2016 04:00:27 +0000
Received: from rtp-vpn1-510.cisco.com (rtp-vpn1-510.cisco.com [10.82.225.254]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5240QiO001749 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <insipid@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 04:00:27 GMT
From: Paul Giralt <pgiralt@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <55234C8F-2A40-4B9E-8976-620A00FFEFF8@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 00:00:24 -0400
To: insipid@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/SsYq_HTYOA0QvV7cdNu4fGA0neI>
Subject: [Insipid] MUST or SHOULD for Type 4 / 5 UUIDs?
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 04:00:31 -0000

INSIPID WG, 

Ben pointed out that we have an inconsistency in the draft. Section 4 states that endpoints SHOULD use Type 4 or Type 5 UUIDs when generating a Session Identifier, however Section 12 states that Type 4 or 5 MUST be used for privacy reasons. 

I’m inclined to change the first to MUST and thereby require that only Type 4 or Type 5 UUID’s be used. 

Does anyone have an issue with this change? 

-Paul