Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solution draft Version 11
"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Sat, 24 January 2015 00:49 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 506AE1A8961 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:49:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 1xXWiFAGYNkg for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:49:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D1811A8960 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:49:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (cpe-098-027-048-015.nc.res.rr.com [98.27.48.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t0O0naXr027261 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:49:37 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1422060577; bh=Sz393TqndsOjsuNc+MmY9PghfR04mc6KTppHDtRIqQI=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Reply-To; b=VTZeLj3ZG3PZuGxmi8DjUVfnuv07mqgExO/8fYiHN94vhoCWrLk92A1NxdEY6NQKJ lkKWRmz3jz7fm3Vy0LS9BLHzvThQx+z/63ug/jBzklg53fwSagu+z+7+yNH28qB/Wl 7WKvx++7uNh4dKdv7um/IM1sMYXoa1BNV/Ntog9w=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, insipid@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 00:49:47 +0000
Message-Id: <em73d79643-a12b-4d43-b365-aa62462f26d9@sydney>
In-Reply-To: <54C26EC5.60202@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: eM_Client/6.0.21372.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/cqvhvE7F26e0ZiF6i8Tkn_mMNDA>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solution draft Version 11
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: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 00:49:41 -0000
OK. How about this? "The Session-ID header-value is technically case-INSENSITIVE, but only lowercase characters are allowed in the sess-uuid components. Receiving entities MUST treat sess-uuid components as case-insensitive and not produce an error if an uppercase character is received in a sess-uuid." Do you have better wording than "component"? I don't like that, but I guess that's clear. I'm open to suggested changes. Paul ------ Original Message ------ From: "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>; insipid@ietf.org Sent: 1/23/2015 10:54:45 AM Subject: Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solution draft Version 11 >On 1/22/15 11:58 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: >>Specifically, how about this at the end of section 5? >> >>NOTE: The Session-ID header-value is technically case-INSENSITIVE, but >>only lowercase characters are allowed in the sess-uuid components of >>the >>syntax. > >Its better than nothing. But I think it would be better to make a >normative requirement to support reception of uuids in either case, >while requiring that they be sent in lower case. This makes it clear >that it is only an accommodation to non-conforming implementations. > > Thanks, > Paul > >>------ Original Message ------ >>From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> >>To: "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>; insipid@ietf.org >>Sent: 1/22/2015 11:53:48 PM >>Subject: Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solution draft >>Version 11 >> >>>Paul, >>> >>>>>>>I think it would be worth to mention that the UUID is case >>>>>>>insensitive >>>>>>>as defined in RFC 4122 >>>>>> >>>>>>The text currently states that the UUID characters are lower-case. >>>>>>The >>>>>>syntax also enforces this. The RFC 4122 text is funny, because it >>>>>>says >>>>>>"lower case characters and are case insensitive". I don't know >>>>>>what >>>>>>that means, except that "F" is not a valid character. Rather than >>>>>>create confusing language, I'd rather just leave the text as it is >>>>>>in >>>>>>saying the characters are lowercase. >>>>> >>>>>[RJ] OK >>>> >>>>The *safest* (belt and suspenders) way of dealing with this would be >>>>to require that senders always insert lower case, but require that >>>>receivers properly process either upper/lower case. >>>> >>>>IMO it *should* always have been case-insensitive. IIRC the reason >>>>it >>>>isn't that way is because Kaplan was case sensitive and there are >>>>implementations in the wild that depend on it. >>> >>>I just looked at RFC 7239 and found this: >>> >>> NOTE: The sess-id value is technically case-INSENSITIVE, but only >>> lowercase characters are allowed. >>> >>>Shall we include the same text in our draft? >>> >>>Paul >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>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] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solution… Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… R.Jesske
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei)
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Arun Arunachalam
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Brett Tate
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Arun Arunachalam
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… R.Jesske
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… R.Jesske
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… R.Jesske
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Insipid] Reviews for INSIPID Session-ID solu… Paul Kyzivat