[Sipping] Re: [spitstop] Spit Score Semantics

At Thu, 22 Nov 2007 20:43:54 +0100,
Saverio Niccolini wrote:
> all we were trying to do was to answer the question about semantics
> raised by Henning some time ago. He was arguing that without semantics
> the spam score has no meaning and that is why we answered to it (after
> thinking quite some time...).
> 
> As you know some examples of architecture are out already together with a
> reference scenario (draft expired):
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tschofenig-sipping-framework-spit-reduction-02
> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-niccolini-sipping-spitstop-00.txt
> 
> Moreover some reference architecture for prototypes/products exist as
> well (we demonstrated at last IETF our demo to interested people)
> and there are scientific results in the literature that would justify
> the semantics we are reporting here.

Saverio,

I'd be very interested in reading these results. Could you please
point me to the appropriate papers?

Thanks,
-Ekr

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP