Re: AW: AW: AW: [Sipping-tispan] TISPAN requirements, first requiemen ts

Hi Roland:

If you don't have a P-Asserted-Identity in the signalling, is because 
the trust relationship has been broken at some point, in which case, you 
shouldn't trust also the role parameter independently of the header 
where you put it.

The nice property of adding a role parameter to the P-Asserted-Identity 
header is that you get the trust for free, which is the expected 
behaviour for this service.

/Miguel

Jesske, R wrote:

>>>I think it might be worth considering adding role parameters to 
>>>P-Asserted-ID.
>>
>>That is OK with me and solves most of the problems.
>>
> 
> 
> 
> Paul,
> I have to revice my proposal. 
> I thought that is the solution to bind it to the P-Asserted-Id. But in the case were we have a anonymous communication restricted by the network. We usually have no Calling Party number. And therefore also no P-Asserted-Identity.
> So we cannot bind this to the P-Asserted-Identity.
> 
> Perhaps we can bind it to the privacy header?
> 
> Or any other?
> 
> Best Regards.
> 
> Roalnd
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping-tispan mailing list
> Sipping-tispan@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
sip:miguel.an.garcia@openlaboratory.net
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland

_______________________________________________
Sipping-tispan mailing list
Sipping-tispan@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan