Re: [Sip] cnonce in RFC 3261
"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Thu, 03 June 2010 23:18 UTC
Return-Path: <jmpolk@cisco.com>
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 545293A682A for <sip@core3.amsl.com>;
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:18:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 jAqNk0lYxgwY for
<sip@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by
core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7983A67ED for <sip@ietf.org>;
Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com;
dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAH/VB0xAaMHG/2dsb2JhbACeMnGlBJoPhRYEg0g
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,357,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="139130303"
Received: from syd-core-1.cisco.com ([64.104.193.198]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com
with ESMTP; 03 Jun 2010 23:18:18 +0000
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8713.cisco.com
[10.99.80.20]) by syd-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id
o53NIFWn004207; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 23:18:16 GMT
Message-Id: <201006032318.o53NIFWn004207@syd-core-1.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:18:14 -0500
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?I=C3=B1aki?= Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>,
Moloud Mousavi <moloud@blueslice.com>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim9Ed6GTfUwZ2631AhE84E0Sq_0C2ltOF-7XLfJ@mail.gmail.c om>
References: <345A3596DB43194797927F6ADFBFFFEF02619B68F9@EX41.exchserver.com>
<AANLkTinfWCU9mpXsZi7g0DCyO3KEQL44vzXGTdtzKpNR@mail.gmail.com>
<345A3596DB43194797927F6ADFBFFFEF02619B6D46@EX41.exchserver.com>
<AANLkTim9Ed6GTfUwZ2631AhE84E0Sq_0C2ltOF-7XLfJ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
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 23:18:33 -0000
Iñaki Baz Castillo FWIW -- the only one being rude in this discussion is you. You could have used a better tone when telling Mousavi that the sip-implementers list is where these questions should be asked. James At 11:52 AM 6/3/2010, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: >2010/6/3 Moloud Mousavi ><moloud@blueslice.com>e.com>: > 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 mailing >list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip >This list is essentially closed and only used >for finishing old business. Use >sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions >on how to develop a SIP implementation. Use >dispatch@ietf.org for new developments on the >application of sip. Use sipcore@ietf.org for >issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.
- [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