Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location conveyance 09
"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Wed, 21 November 2007 00:34 UTC
Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IudXd-0006Lo-Ae; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:34:09 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IudXb-0006Co-JU for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:34:07 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IudXb-0006CV-9X for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:34:07 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IudXU-0001Up-GE for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:34:07 -0500
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Nov 2007 16:34:00 -0800
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id lAL0Y0Ii013715; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:34:00 -0800
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id lAL0Xx40002038; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:33:59 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.187]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:33:59 -0800
Received: from jmpolk-wxp.cisco.com ([10.21.148.187]) by xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:33:59 -0800
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:33:58 -0600
To: Daniel Grotti <daniel.grotti@unibo.it>, IETF SIP List <sip@ietf.org>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location conveyance 09
In-Reply-To: <4742BDF5.9040302@unibo.it>
References: <4742BDF5.9040302@unibo.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Message-ID: <XFE-SJC-212qXLFfJNw000012bf@xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Nov 2007 00:33:59.0531 (UTC) FILETIME=[352EBBB0:01C82BD6]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2563; t=1195605240; x=1196469240; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jmpolk@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22James=20M.=20Polk=22=20<jmpolk@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Sip]=20a=20question=20about=20IETF=20draft=20locatio n=20conveyance=2009=20 |Sender:=20; bh=xXG2vbWlanvoo0CdbQ8/3NP+QI1n4MgT/+2Lt8q+RJQ=; b=e1go5d9OFsyeezWvYRiqTGpyNqgvNSQgg5qlnVz/agDe0XnRd6YP7u9r8/Sg4JaB73ZlbjLH 3RwE9Z/9nHLr5sFXbrPaqsvLXRUPQe4dS7TRXhtf3SwzkWTFQpPmPIEl;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=jmpolk@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135
Cc:
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Daniel wow... you nailed this one quickly. Neither the SIP WG nor Geopriv WG have a position with regard to this. I don't like the parameter at all, and have said so from its introduction into discussions about putting it in the draft. I don't think it accomplishes much more than confusion or a false sense of security by implementors. That said, a proxy has "ar" capabilities wrt the Geolocation according to Table 1. (on page 7), and associated text states this pretty clearly. There is no text (not even a hint) that a proxy cannot read a location because "recipient=endpoint", therefore it can. I would take this "recipient=" parameter as a hint to each type of SIP entity that + if a UAS receives this parameter (meaning in a SIP request with a Geolocation header), and it is set to "recipient", the UAS shouldn't ignore the location in the request (like it otherwise might). + If a proxy receives this parameter (meaning in a SIP request with a Geolocation header), and it is set to "server", the proxy shouldn't ignore the location in the request (like it otherwise might). I don't think either indication *ever* means the other SIP entity type cannot view the location, based on the parameter. The only exception I can think of is a Location-by-value hidden by S/MIME means no one save who has the decryption key can view the contents of what's encrypted. Does this make sense? James At 04:59 AM 11/20/2007, Daniel Grotti wrote: >Hi all, >I'd like to ask a question about "draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-09.txt". > >How does Proxy Server have to work when a Geolocation Header contain >"recipient=endpoint" parameter ? >Does the Proxy server just have to forward the SIP message (without >do anything else) or can it read the information conveyed ? >thanks, >Regards >daniel > >-- > >--------------------------------------------------- >Daniel Grotti >DEIS - University of Bologna >Via Venezia, 52 - 47023 Cesena (FC) - ITALY > >Contacts >e-mail : daniel.grotti@unibo.it >Skype name : Daniel Grotti >--------------------------------------------------- > > > >_______________________________________________ >Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip >This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol >Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip >Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
- [Sip] a question about IETF draft location convey… Daniel Grotti
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… James M. Polk
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… Ted Hardie
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… James M. Polk
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… Ted Hardie
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… James M. Polk
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… Ted Hardie
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… Dean Willis
- R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location con… daniel grotti
- Re: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location… Hannes Tschofenig
- R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location … daniel grotti
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Hannes Tschofenig
- R: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locati… daniel grotti
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Dean Willis
- R: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locati… daniel grotti
- RE: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- RE: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… James M. Polk
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Matt Lepinski
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… James M. Polk
- RE: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Ted Hardie
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Ted Hardie
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… Dean Willis
- Re: R: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft locat… James M. Polk
- Re: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location… James M. Polk
- Re: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location co… James M. Polk
- Re: R: [Sip] a question about IETF draft location… Paul Kyzivat