IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-callinfo-spam-01 - SIP entities

"Asveren, Tolga" <tasveren@sonusnet.com> Thu, 20 July 2017 18:41 UTC

Return-Path: <tasveren@sonusnet.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 18C37131B7A for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.491
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.491 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=sonusnetworks.onmicrosoft.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lk6YV46YWoPE for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-126.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-126.mimecast.com [216.205.24.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25E84127342 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=SonusNetworks.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-sonusnet-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=TxsmaC0cQ+APkLthodel/ZZfNvoqbYREP//Hg2N7o9g=; b=KBzpvm0OsSzpk/kJyA9EsmK+rQ2iNFS2Uce/gR6kiMs3VKYSzrTAk9GrZWH2a3OPgSDNlV+0cjGcpFfZ1y0SJ8yfB9U949+4xd6v4bJW04Pshyo++lhroVPYL4jDSETJ+7xmmfDV0fciQEU1GmgHP/mc/YqlUFYcdfMv1XoyUF4=
Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-cys01nam02lp0047.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.47]) (Using TLS) by us-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-133-SiWgY-KhNVODmTLgAyxPTQ-1; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:41:11 -0400
Received: from SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.210.141) by SN2PR03MB015.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.255.175.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1199.15; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:41:07 +0000
Received: from SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.210.141]) by SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.210.141]) with mapi id 15.01.1282.011; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:41:07 +0000
From: "Asveren, Tolga" <tasveren@sonusnet.com>
To: Henning Schulzrinne <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "sipcore@ietf.org" <sipcore@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-callinfo-spam-01 - SIP entities
Thread-Index: AQHS//8f86lEHhh9VUKR5rSbwxo4z6Ja0ofAgABzoYCAAC1loIAAAo2AgAAGWUCAACJWAIABaRBw
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:41:07 +0000
Message-ID: <SN2PR03MB2350515B6772F8676C96678FB2A70@SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CY1PR09MB07602078727954F586DCBDD3EAA10@CY1PR09MB0760.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <SN2PR03MB235023C01D8658B9B25A3577B2A60@SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <75f4364f-a10d-18eb-f547-8bdb17acef78@alum.mit.edu> <SN2PR03MB23509530AE70988D06A97191B2A60@SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CY1PR09MB07606A3F6AD98F8CB7235FD5EAA60@CY1PR09MB0760.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <SN2PR03MB2350B8FDFC86CC4DDA03F013B2A60@SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CY1PR09MB07602F832CB319979A6FDB29EAA60@CY1PR09MB0760.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY1PR09MB07602F832CB319979A6FDB29EAA60@CY1PR09MB0760.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [73.29.18.75]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN2PR03MB015; 20:U7xMGTV7V/cOwzSriC+JOCi3eLtHNBCYRMuzMpNDAsITG4TI5bmNPv3HhQE7GsbcIRVm9KrQLuil7Cis0qXi9ids6ytx9H5Q8pbDYYvlZid74swSGudNN8lnlCWZUaDixRcYpZZSEUbTVqBHD6/VUzQTNwrOSyiOlU2sLVA2s/w=
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1c4e7579-53af-43cc-9e64-08d4cf9ee25a
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(300000500095)(300135000095)(300000501095)(300135300095)(22001)(300000502095)(300135100095)(2017030254075)(300000503095)(300135400095)(2017052603031)(201703131423075)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(300000504095)(300135200095)(300000505095)(300135600095)(300000506095)(300135500095); SRVR:SN2PR03MB015;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN2PR03MB015:
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(236129657087228);
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SN2PR03MB015781CB9F65A39AEE5253DB2A70@SN2PR03MB015.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000700101)(100105000095)(100000701101)(100105300095)(100000702101)(100105100095)(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(2017060910075)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(100000703101)(100105400095)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123562025)(20161123558100)(20161123564025)(20161123560025)(20161123555025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(6072148)(100000704101)(100105200095)(100000705101)(100105500095); SRVR:SN2PR03MB015; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000800101)(100110000095)(100000801101)(100110300095)(100000802101)(100110100095)(100000803101)(100110400095)(100000804101)(100110200095)(100000805101)(100110500095); SRVR:SN2PR03MB015;
x-forefront-prvs: 0374433C81
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39400400002)(39410400002)(39830400002)(39450400003)(13464003)(377454003)(478600001)(25786009)(7696004)(54356999)(55016002)(93886004)(6506006)(33656002)(76176999)(77096006)(50986999)(229853002)(6436002)(305945005)(8676002)(74316002)(230783001)(189998001)(9686003)(5660300001)(38730400002)(53936002)(6246003)(3846002)(86362001)(81166006)(2171002)(8936002)(102836003)(66066001)(6116002)(2900100001)(2950100002)(3660700001)(7736002)(53546010)(2906002)(3280700002)(99286003)(2501003)(14454004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN2PR03MB015; H:SN2PR03MB2350.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: sonusnet.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 20 Jul 2017 18:41:07.4517 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 29a671dc-ed7e-4a54-b1e5-8da1eb495dc3
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN2PR03MB015
X-MC-Unique: SiWgY-KhNVODmTLgAyxPTQ-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="WINDOWS-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/ZagOExDqQo21oKamvKzUpL3teWI>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-callinfo-spam-01 - SIP entities
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:41:16 -0000

O.K., this sounds good. It really could be good to add a sentence or two about this issue -even if the syntax already defines "spam" as optional"- though.
"Use of spam parameter requires a fine granularity decision about the nature of the call. It may not be possible to easily predict or use in an efficient way for certain networks, call flows, end-points."

Thanks,
Tolga

-----Original Message-----
From: Henning Schulzrinne [mailto:Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:46 PM
To: Asveren, Tolga <tasveren@sonusnet.com>; Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>; sipcore@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-callinfo-spam-01 - SIP entities

If a service provider wants to provide a binary indication using the draft, they can, by omitting the 'spam' probability indicator:

Call-Info: ... ;purpose=info ;type=spam

Or

Call-Info: ... ;purpose=info ;type=personal

for non-spam.

Henning

-----Original Message-----
From: Asveren, Tolga [mailto:tasveren@sonusnet.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 2:46 PM
To: Henning Schulzrinne <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov>; Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>; sipcore@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-callinfo-spam-01 - SIP entities

Agreed that this is somewhat about "philosophical aspects of priority". Having said that, I really feel not content with a fine-granularity indicator considering how in practice it would/could be generated especially considering all the operator/equipment/call scenario/deployment model combinations. It would be like, actually worse, than how sausages are prepared.

I am not religiously advocating a change toward a binary indicator (i.e. I wouldn't consider the current model as something "wrong") but IMHO that would be a more practical way of getting something useful at the end; just my 2 cents.

Thanks,
Tolga

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email