RE: [Sipping] Re: Questions on draft-jennings-sipping-pay-00

[Tschofenig Hannes <[e-mail]>]

hi wolfgang, 

thanks for pointing to saml-sip. in fact i have added a few lines to the
updated draft on the compensation issue (section 6.4 of
http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/drafts/draft-tschofenig-sip-saml-01.txt) . 
i agree with you that there is some potential for new services beyond just
spam prevention. 

ciao
hannes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Beck01, Wolfgang [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Montag, 25. Oktober 2004 17:41
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: AW: [Sipping] Re: Questions on draft-jennings-sipping-pay-00
> 
> 
> >On 7/15/04 3:01 AM, "Elwell, John" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> >> Cullen,
> >> 
> >> 1. I see nothing to indicate what happens if the called
> user is busy,
> >> switched off, etc. at the time the request with receipt
> arrives. This
> >> might be a particular problem for the case where the UAS is a PSTN 
> >> gateway, since it probably won't check on the availability of the 
> >> destination user before sending the 402, so if the party is not 
> >> available or busy it will probably still be not available or busy 
> >> when the request with receipt arrives.
> 
> > yes - this is a somewhat fundamental limitation of the
> whole system. 
> > It somewhat assumes that if you pay, you will at least go to 
> > voicemail. Even if the proxy found out if the UA was
> online, there is
> > no  way to know if the user will answer, or if they do
> answer, will they instantly hangup.
> 
> By the end of the month, the merchant presents his receipts to the 
> Payment Service Provider and gets the money. The merchant (= the PSTN 
> gateway
> provider) could choose to discard receipts for calls to unavailable 
> destinations.
> 
> When I wrote
> http://www.potaroo.net/ietf/idref/draft-beck-sipping-svc-charging-req/
> (http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/03mar/slides/sipping-8.pdf)
> two years ago, I had such a scheme in mind. Re-INVITEs carrying 
> receipts of small sums could limit the damage for the caller if the 
> called party cheats.

>  
> As there is a financial incentive for malicious users, security is 
> even more critical than for other protocols.
> Installing malicious programs on a victim's PC that call expensive 
> numbers is worse than just installing DDoS bots (but perhaps clueless 
> users will finally secure their system if they have to pay). On the 
> other hand, will users accept a system where they have to type in a 
> password every time they make a call? Can 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tschofenig-sip-saml-00.txt
> help?
> 
> Besides Spam prevention, draft-jennings-sipping-pay allows new useful 
> services.


ciao
hannes

> 
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> --
> T-Systems
> IP Platform Services
> Am Kavalleriesand 3
> 64295 Darmstadt
> Germany
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP 
> Use [e-mail] for questions on current 
> sip Use [e-mail] for new developments of core SIP
> 

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
Use [e-mail] for new developments of core SIP