IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Insipid] Posted draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-06

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Thu, 10 April 2014 03:53 UTC

Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB251A03CD for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.374
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.374 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 46T6qhtQLLa5 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9251A03C6 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (cpe-024-211-197-136.nc.res.rr.com [24.211.197.136]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s3A3r2LT017614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <insipid@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 23:53:03 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1397101983; bh=d7XpDq2i9NdyYhbsNT8IJd6XGdiTcC1x6UBoBa6r9Hg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Content-Type:Message-Id:Mime-Version: Reply-To; b=rZ52iD+2bY75/AdUaG3U6ewPu+FfhCeUYyOr2FpsIZ08pgPRTJvdCRQO+JShaDPqd HsC9JddcRvxJ3KdcljRP6XRz/DOp34mdZKJfCbfE1tdeUSN6yTU2IY0q03o3zbSZky 3qkVzXYm45gXNjDFWa7xljdyaq3LI/NmY9Fyzg64=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: insipid@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:53:22 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MB1A31EA64-EA42-4E7E-B13C-7BD311F667CF"
Message-Id: <em6dea9ca0-54dc-4ba2-9109-3ace50e7baca@sydney>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: eM_Client/6.0.19861.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/Ujjh7Qcfo2B7Ql7t8P5M7DsFTqk
Subject: [Insipid] Posted draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-06
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
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: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:53:05 -0000

Folks,

I just uploaded a revised version of the Session ID solution draft.  In 
this draft, we did the following:
Added text to Section 7 (intermediaries) to describe handling of 
provisional responsesWIth one typo "intermediaries transmits" (will fix 
that in the next version)Changed the UUID values used for OOD REFER 
(Section 9.9) per list discussionAdded one new paragraph on security 
considerations
Please have a look at the draft and suggest other things we need to 
address, including any issues you believe we need to raise in the 
security considerations.

Thanks,
Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email