Re: [sipcore] Yet more comments on rfc4244bis-02

Ian Elz <ian_elz@yahoo.co.uk> Tue, 09 November 2010 17:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ian_elz@yahoo.co.uk>
X-Original-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A7DE3A6A11 for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:41:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_74=0.6]
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 397QtxdNSS0W for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:41:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nm3-vm1.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com (nm3-vm1.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com [77.238.189.212]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 529393A682F for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:41:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [77.238.189.54] by nm3.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2010 17:41:51 -0000
Received: from [212.82.108.115] by tm7.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2010 17:41:51 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1024.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Nov 2010 17:41:51 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 315970.94426.bm@omp1024.mail.ird.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 26287 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Nov 2010 17:41:51 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s1024; t=1289324511; bh=+ITzauehHJ3yE0L/6N8i4PUr4a9KoLIIClaq7FKa+js=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=uNKN/SKtjudu0zs5koutB/IDrTi1Ivw4/woMu2VgRFibRDaDko9STvgOTie/kG1jwiDW7RsMZ8ncJbXxgsJGT/v0xEh9WTkCYoB5iv5rkN0ccu8bbaulIRB5upi8zZa6wch9chrJvfYqt740EDcP+nB5v9CaCgQT/ncFBvxFrUQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=LDTZwU03uIEqpQ1pDPDu3VULT46KMGI/pnS8c2bdQ0ZamMcssWezn3LcOFKuIejTqapMLweulWCX9M+HFWH0Ai0Qn4pFHUibuDGpGYZzD2GGSFtuY3oza8CTAEiGJu89WejeYcnWnDkYFuhiuSvjFzWEJr4e56YKHglgE/B6ySM=;
Message-ID: <231164.26050.qm@web29108.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: 0VGmvA4VM1kVnxqf08fCy9F0xl1MVgws6FPTFM6m.hGIGUd BKlz2PKIv
Received: from [86.20.66.247] by web29108.mail.ird.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:41:50 GMT
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.284920
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:41:50 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ian Elz <ian_elz@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: sipcore@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sipcore] Yet more comments on rfc4244bis-02
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Ian Elz <ian_elz@yahoo.co.uk>
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 09 Nov 2010 17:41:33 -0000

Paul,

As a lot of this functionality is performed by a B2BUA (yes those dreaded things again) the To header will be modified in the forwarded INVITE. This allows the forwarding user to remain anonymous to the final destination.

The H-I is passed through so that inter-working with ISUP diverting information can occur if necessary.

Ian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat@cisco.com>
To: sipcore@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, 9 November, 2010 12:10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [sipcore] Yet more comments on rfc4244bis-02



On 11/8/2010 1:17 PM, Ian Elz wrote:
> Hadriel,
>
> Roland missed one other case in his reply.
>
> If I divert a call I may want my identity to be private even if the original caller allows his identity to be presented; i.e. I don't want the final destination of the call to know the identity of the diverting party.

Won't your identity still be present in the To URI?

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Ian Elz
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hadriel Kaplan"<HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
> To: "Shida Schubert"<shida@ntt-at.com>
> Cc: sipcore@ietf.org
> Sent: Monday, 8 November, 2010 3:01:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [sipcore] Yet more comments on rfc4244bis-02
>
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2010, at 6:01 AM, Shida Schubert wrote:
>
>> Privacy:none is used when caller (UAC) wants his/her identity delivered
>> to the destination (callee) despite the existence of privacy service, but
>> with regards to H-I, when does it ever contain the URI that identifies the
>> caller (UAC) ?
>> I agree that privacy:none will be valid if we can find a situation where
>> URI of UA will be one of the hi-entry but my imagination is not strong
>> enough to see this.
>
> But that also begs the question of why we need a Privacy header of "history" to begin with. (I mean a real Privacy header in the message, not an embedded one in a particular HI URI)
>
> The only case I could imagine for such things is that the caller doesn't want their domain known about.  I.e., I make an anonymous call from my SIP phone through my corporate SIP proxy, and my SIP phone sets "Privacy: history" so that Acme Packet's anonymization proxy removes "acmepacket.com" from any H-Is, before sending it out our SIP trunk, etc.
>
> -hadriel
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipcore mailing list
> sipcore@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>