Re: [sipcore] RESPONSE REQUESTED: SIPCORE work and milestones

[[e-mail] (Dale R. Worley)]

Adam Roach <[e-mail]> writes:
>  4. Fixing Content-ID in SIP, as discussed in
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg07245.html>,
>     with <draft-holmberg-sipcore-content-id> as a likely candidate draft.
>  5. Clarifications around SIP name-addr, with
>     <draft-sparks-sipcore-name-addr-guidance> as a likely candidate draft

These two are essentially bug fixes, and it seems that we are already in
need of their results.  Also, the amount of additional work to complete
them is small.  So they appear to be the highest-priority items.

>  1. "Happy Eyeballs for SIP" (aka Happy Earballs), currently under
>     discussion on the list.

I'm involved in working on this, so I think it's useful.  Generally, its
usefulness hinges on how many SIP systems are both (1) dual-stack and
(2) use general RFC 3263 mechanisms to find servers (i.e., aren't in
heavily configured environments).  But if we want to support SIP over
the general Internet in the future, we'll need this.

>  2. "DTLS Transport for SIP", as proposed by Tolga Asveren's recent
>     messages.

I think this is a good idea, as it solves a problem that Roman Shpount
and Tolga Asveren have both mentioned as important.  Do other people who
work with large-scale servers feel a need for DTLS or DTLS-like
signaling transport?

>  3. A mechanism for labeling the nature of SIP calls, with
>     <draft-schulzrinne-sipcore-callinfo-spam> as a likely candidate draft.

Certainly spam calls are a problem in reality.  Do people consider this
a way to help suppress them in practice?

Dale