IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Insipid] draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-14: comments and questions

"Paul Giralt (pgiralt)" <pgiralt@cisco.com> Tue, 05 January 2016 22:22 UTC

Return-Path: <pgiralt@cisco.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 CE3771AC3CC for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:22:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 c1FYGob19XVB for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:22:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78AF11A0200 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:22:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2312; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452032539; x=1453242139; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=QM/8CooGsQg6LAMvEtXXHHpNNJa/jWLgutMLqNyC+fM=; b=dHUBH1XJiAZK158BzUIT+p3z/kR/kcAIFFB89grG3sbEIy2PgrikefTC jZJOXnWI6zDMntk51/9nI1csuqgsC+KfKHUft6DdMnMJW21kjqfWzgu/Y hFIULn83qmv2PFTiKl0OIGkR6ku3kzvs84wSoLlGVINaWtAaKeEJdsJOC E=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 842
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DNAgDzQIxW/5pdJa1eDoMsgT8GiFOzaQ6BZIYPAoEfOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqENAEBAQMBI1YFCwIBCA4KKgICMiUCBA4FDogZCLFbkGgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEPCYZWgg8IgmiHcy6BGwWXCAGCcoFliHuOfY5AASABQ4NMPnKEWYEIAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,526,1444694400"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="223056315"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jan 2016 22:22:18 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (xch-rtp-019.cisco.com [64.101.220.159]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u05MMI9a018462 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:22:18 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-018.cisco.com (64.101.220.158) by XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (64.101.220.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:22:17 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-018.cisco.com ([64.101.220.158]) by XCH-RTP-018.cisco.com ([64.101.220.158]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:22:17 -0500
From: "Paul Giralt (pgiralt)" <pgiralt@cisco.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Thread-Topic: [Insipid] draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-14: comments and questions
Thread-Index: AQHRR/JzMWCbSOSJWUGyzP+voiqgxp7t0v6A
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 22:22:17 +0000
Message-ID: <0F5C0FE1-7A7B-4030-B75B-0A3B137B2476@cisco.com>
References: <3281541955cae98a74545990e0bf5c35@mail.gmail.com> <568C1EAE.2030502@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <568C1EAE.2030502@alum.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.123.203]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A0E839D9-648B-4BB3-8EB4-5D1628520D87"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/YvtAdIMi7a3hRsDWIpSZ5oKafAs>
Cc: "insipid@ietf.org" <insipid@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-14: comments and questions
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 22:22:21 -0000

I don’t think it’s all doom and gloom. I think in the majority of cases the Session-ID will be consistent end-to-end. It is these corner case error conditions that lead to ambiguity as to the right thing to do which is why I’d prefer expected behavior be documented as clearly as possible, even if it may knowingly result in a situation where all devices don’t necessarily agree on the Session-ID for some period of time in the call. I think there will still be enough information in the message exchange that any post-processing tools being used to diagnose a problem will have enough information to correlate calls even in such scenarios.

-Paul


> On Jan 5, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> This discussion is reinforcing my belief that this mechanism is a mess - that the chance is slim to none of getting consistent results in all the connected devices.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email