Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method

On 5/18/2011 7:29 AM, Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat) wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I think that the main reason for using Headers for actions and parameters is to allow for proxy applications on the call path to recognize the requested action, as some UAs might encrypt the body part.

Hmm. That seems to me to be more reason to use a body part!

What possible reason would an intermediary have for snooping into these 
actions?

Note that this functionality is *very* sensitive - in the wrong hands 
this stuff can do great damage. I predict that there will be a lot of 
demand for very strong security considerations. Putting the action in a 
body and encrypting it might be a good approach.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> Regards,
>   Rifaat
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: splices-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:splices-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Paul Kyzivat
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 3:09 PM
>> To: splices@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/17/2011 2:20 PM, Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat) wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, and I have the following open question about these parameters:
>>> Should a separate header be defined for action parameters?
>>
>> I can be convinced otherwise (by a good justification), but I'm inclined
>> toward describing the action and any parameters in a body part.
>>
>> 	Thanks,
>> 	Paul
>> _______________________________________________
>> splices mailing list
>> splices@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/splices
>