Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261
Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 03 June 2010 16:52 UTC
Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id B6DBA3A69E4 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>;
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.13
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.13 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.207,
BAYES_50=0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pi5pvoSGQxGr for
<sip@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f195.google.com (mail-pz0-f195.google.com
[209.85.222.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80C43A63C9 for
<sip@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:52:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33so335255pzk.17 for <sip@ietf.org>;
Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:52:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.143.26.28 with SMTP id d28mr6839478wfj.103.1275583954215;
Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.252.19 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <345A3596DB43194797927F6ADFBFFFEF02619B6D46@EX41.exchserver.com>
References: <345A3596DB43194797927F6ADFBFFFEF02619B68F9@EX41.exchserver.com>
<AANLkTinfWCU9mpXsZi7g0DCyO3KEQL44vzXGTdtzKpNR@mail.gmail.com>
<345A3596DB43194797927F6ADFBFFFEF02619B6D46@EX41.exchserver.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 18:52:33 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTim9Ed6GTfUwZ2631AhE84E0Sq_0C2ltOF-7XLfJ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Moloud Mousavi <moloud@blueslice.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "sip@ietf.org" <sip@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:52:54 -0000
2010/6/3 Moloud Mousavi <moloud@blueslice.com>om>: > Hello Iñaki, > > This is the explanation of cnonce in RFC 2617: > > cnonce > This MUST be specified if a qop directive is sent (see above), and > MUST NOT be specified if the server did not send a qop directive in > the WWW-Authenticate header field. The cnonce-value is an opaque > quoted string value provided by the client and used by both client > and server to avoid chosen plaintext attacks, to provide mutual > authentication, and to provide some message integrity protection. > See the descriptions below of the calculation of the responsedigest > and request-digest values. > > > It seems that cnonce existence is optional, but then If you want to calculate the responseDigest, you have to consider that again. > > Assuming both the same: in fact I tried putting the same value for nonce and cnonce, and it didn't work. Where did you read that nonce and cnonce have to be equal? > If my question is trivial, why do "YOU" bother to put time to answer me back, leave it to someone else. First of all, this maillist is not the place to ask trivial or non trivial questions about already approved specifications for SIP protocol, use sip-implementors instead. Second: you should be not so rude with people trying to help you. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
- [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 Moloud Mousavi
- Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 Tom Taylor
- Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261 James M. Polk