Re: [martini] Call for Consensus: Support for Public GRUUs

+1

Adam Roach wrote:
> 
> I agree with Andrew on this point
> 
> The key issue in my mind is deployability. With a single registrar, 
> deployment of GRUUs is a fairly tractable problem: once the registrar 
> supports GRUUs, then clients can start making use of them. When we start 
> having more entities involved in the mix -- like the dual-registrar 
> situation that MARTINI was chartered to address -- then the chances of 
> deployment decrease multiplicatively.
> 
> In other words, unless GRUU is mandated in GIN (or any solution to the 
> MARTINI problem, for that matter), the chances of GRUU deployment are 
> vanishingly small, in a way that doesn't exist in a single-registrar 
> system. Because the MARTINI architecture *caused* this problem, I 
> believe that it is incumbent on us to *fix* this problem.
> 
> As public GRUU is really quite easy to implement, I don't imagine that 
> this requirement should be particularly controversial.
> 
> /a
> 
> On 8/29/10 09:28, Aug 29, Andrew Allen wrote:
>>
>> I certainly agree with the compromise we worked out in Masstricht. As 
>> I stated during the meeting GRUU is basically a bug fix for SIP and 
>> without it originally intended basic SIP capabilities either break, 
>> have negative side effects or have significant limitations on other 
>> capabilities in order to make them work.
>>
>> Public GRUU is not complex to implement and with temporary GRUU the 
>> compromise gives enough wiggle room to allow other alternatives that 
>> provide anonymity to be used provided they don't break the use of 
>> Public GRUUs.
>>
>> The privacy text is not so much about implementing privacy as to 
>> ensure that deployments don't break GRUU capabilities in order to 
>> achieve privacy.
>>
>> Especially in enterprise deployments (which is the major MARTINI use 
>> case) endpoints will likely not have public IP addresses (or will have 
>> SBCs that modify them). So the need for GRUU support here is even more 
>> essential than "generic internet SIP".
>>
>> So I agree that SSPs supporting MARTINI MUST implement support for 
>> providing public GRUUs.
>>
>> Andrew
>>  
>> *From*: Bernard Aboba [mailto:bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
>> *Sent*: Saturday, August 28, 2010 03:44 PM
>> *To*: martini@ietf.org <martini@ietf.org>
>> *Subject*: [martini] Call for Consensus: Support for Public GRUUs
>>  
>> At the IETF 78 MARTINI WG meeting, during the discussion of Ticket 57 
>> (relating to temporary GRUUs), a suggestion was made that public GRUUs 
>> be mandatory to implement for SSPs. 
>>
>> We will now attempt to determine whether consensus exists within the 
>> MARTINI WG to make this change to the document.
>>
>> Please respond to this email and post your opinion as to whether you 
>> agree that SSPs supporting MARTINI MUST implement support for public 
>> GRUUs.
>>
>> This consensus call will last until September 12, 2010. 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential 
>> information, privileged material (including material protected by the 
>> solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute 
>> non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other 
>> than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this 
>> transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and 
>> delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, 
>> distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended 
>> recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> martini mailing list
>> martini@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> martini mailing list
> martini@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini