IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] Martin Duke's Discuss on draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons-01: (with DISCUSS)

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Tue, 25 October 2022 00:00 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30AE8C14F734; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 17:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.398, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ssyn9qsKOSen; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 17:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6970AC14F740; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 17:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([47.186.48.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 29P00cCH059901 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:00:39 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1666656039; bh=busUY1B3AvKHWbVsE9qcGXtz5Zgk3tcqreYU8VbNjIU=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:In-Reply-To:To; b=T3VjI8H2ELDXhsAdAA49ZmJmBes4idu4j48IRv3xh80nShmx8AoBqW0o6pZ/xpd9B 18+qesaQd6MjawTgV5JV72E/HzmUUzI6JNbpngziNjocNbN0TGVD9XHDRUw7q7Ekfi CIk71oKpP6o3f26BjUeuAXjT39D3E6yn7YaO+ZF0=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.48.51] claimed to be smtpclient.apple
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:00:23 -0500
Message-Id: <7A72271F-B1DB-4624-953F-59D3C4EA938F@nostrum.com>
References: <166665387847.4155.18071629484758354380@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons@ietf.org, sipcore-chairs@ietf.org, sipcore@ietf.org, br@brianrosen.net
In-Reply-To: <166665387847.4155.18071629484758354380@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20A392)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/GVY2RBEfncdfl-AesvEHfnd8c0s>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] Martin Duke's Discuss on draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons-01: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sipcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 00:00:50 -0000

We tested this extensively at sipits back in the day. But the real safety valve here is that this applies only to new protocol values and existing implementations ignore values they do not know about. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 24, 2022, at 6:24 PM, Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons-01: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sipcore-multiple-reasons/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> RFC 3326 doesn't specify what the receiver will do if two reason values have
> the same protocol value. Are we reasonably sure that existing implementations
> of SIP won't throw an error if they get this, or does there need to be some
> sort of negotiation mechanism?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email