Re: [stir] Renaming E164Number

"Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz> Fri, 14 April 2017 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=92774589c6=jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
X-Original-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AD4812947B for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 09:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=neustar.biz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JUg7YSz9hja3 for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 09:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-0018ba01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0018ba01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33923126CF9 for <stir@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 09:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0078664.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0018ba01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v3EG3FIw026418; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:14:36 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=neustar.biz; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=neustar-biz; bh=y9SRPsdr7vCDvXzyd2CdRGJE+K5eqVHBaJX09O2YQhg=; b=SKbdZyV+ORyg+iMnfbPc3s350GDCGON/l2yQdEJisvYGrkPMOcyEzM435AzTojFKq3Ts ZOutP/jsBTLCoXRwjT0kODeYdMMgRks/MOXoIjWZqPuiyNQjfYhRRxRk9DP2FrtMRG+H srC5RKluoCexGB7uEcpuTFZCxJk5xlG/1FnbDMd5nfzhKNGCbYAldDpFqNXt8hh9EFng bMK2fCxijPZPG02JCrt96Mh1tm5gxHSyOFkhqD+Z4LX8hZqQoUSQA0WbIHBQpmpoCoAc K4hWgGcM5OpnUDRbnrOEfmWQqwH+8/J2HnM7pCXv5krTYsjmlKU0Of4nzIK+4hrfdABZ ow==
Received: from stntexhc12.cis.neustar.com ([156.154.17.216]) by mx0a-0018ba01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29sxqmafng-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:14:36 -0400
Received: from STNTEXMB10.cis.neustar.com ([169.254.5.33]) by stntexhc12.cis.neustar.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0279.002; Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:14:35 -0400
From: "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
To: Michael Hammer <michael.hammer@yaanatech.com>, "chris-ietf@chriswendt.net" <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
CC: "stir@ietf.org" <stir@ietf.org>, "housley@vigilsec.com" <housley@vigilsec.com>, "md3135@att.com" <md3135@att.com>
Thread-Topic: [stir] Renaming E164Number
Thread-Index: AQHSs+EMytpxAlQ6hEeERwjgqXvU56HCn/6AgAD0ZQCAABdVgP//vysjgAHPDID//9K2gA==
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 16:14:34 +0000
Message-ID: <D5166B9A.1D8946%jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
References: <A803E7B6-2848-4640-AABE-87BBFEA9ACE2@sn3rd.com> <E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E836564AD03061@MISOUT7MSGUSRDB.ITServices.sbc.com> <1043CA0F-0D2E-4130-A4B8-8AC060D34E6B@vigilsec.com> <301EC44E-15CB-47F2-88C4-1ED91FE023E6@chriswendt.net> <8CCC018C-3BB8-48AB-9365-5C52F22174CF@neustar.biz> <00C069FD01E0324C9FFCADF539701DB3BD10819B@sc9-ex2k10mb1.corp.yaanatech.com>
In-Reply-To: <00C069FD01E0324C9FFCADF539701DB3BD10819B@sc9-ex2k10mb1.corp.yaanatech.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.3.160329
x-originating-ip: [10.96.13.31]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <BCBF2E0A077ED042AAE7DDC6A12BA3CD@neustar.biz>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-04-14_11:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704140138
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/8C2DxsvBGjCPbg30gbt-zKeDZ0s>
Subject: Re: [stir] Renaming E164Number
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <stir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stir/>
List-Post: <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 16:14:44 -0000

No mutual understanding of the semantics is required by the authentication
and verification services here - though in practice, calls that are routed
to destinations via a dial string with a * or # in it should end up going
to fairly specialized pieces of equipment, and I'm actually less worried
about canonicalization and so on being an issue for special dial strings
like this than I am for ordinary E.164 numbers. We're not placing any
restrictions on where in the dial string those non-numeric characters
might appear, as there doesn't seem to be anything gained by doing so
except introducing complexity.

In terms of what to call it, if we can't agree on Freddie, I do think TN
or something similarly generic is appropriate. If we already have a group
field for TelphoneNumberRange, why wouldn't the base element be
TelephoneNumber? Or if we'd be overloading some existing registered name
by using that, like TelNum or something?

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.

On 4/14/17, 10:56 AM, "Michael Hammer" <michael.hammer@yaanatech.com>
wrote:

>Jon,
>
>Can the * and # be used arbitrarily anywhere in the string?
>
>Is there some semantic to those characters that needs
>to be understood by both the sender and receiver?
>
>Or does it not matter because the recipient only treats it as an opaque
>string?
>
>________________________________
>Michael Hammer
>michael.hammer@yaanatech.com
>+1 408 202 9291
>
>© 2016 Yaana Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Email
>confidentiality notice. This message is private and confidential. If you
>have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from
>your system.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: stir [mailto:stir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peterson, Jon
>Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 11:19 AM
>To: Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
>Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>rg>; Russ Housley
><housley@vigilsec.com>c.com>; Martin C Dolly <md3135@att.com>
>Subject: Re: [stir] Renaming E164Number
>
>Agreed. We are allowing these non-numeric characters in certs to support
>a corner case that might arise in the future. Let's not agonize over what
>to call the field.
>
>Jon Peterson
>Neustar, Inc.
>
>> On Apr 13, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
>>wrote:
>> 
>> Can we just call it telephoneNumber?  I think we are mostly arguing
>>name here, right?
>> 
>>> On Apr 13, 2017, at 9:47 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Martin:
>>> 
>>> E.164 only allows digits.  What should we call a number that include
>>>digits and * and #?
>>> 
>>> Russ
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 7:13 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C <md3135@att.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Sean,
>>>> 
>>>> DTMF has no end to end meaning for routing, but is meaningful between
>>>>the UE and the SP processing those symbols.
>>>> 
>>>> Therefore, I do not see this as an issue.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Martin
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: stir [mailto:stir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sean Turner
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:04 PM
>>>> To: stir@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: [stir] Renaming E164Number
>>>> 
>>>> In another thread I remember seeing a suggestion to rename E164Number
>>>>to DTMFNumber.  I created an issue:
>>>> 
>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_stirwg_
>>>>certificates_issues_4&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmp
>>>>w7ItG0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=DXAZMIa2681lT
>>>>5v97AAp36rnY1CfZpJifa2PbpimkwQ&e=
>>>> and here's the PR showing the resulting change:
>>>> 
>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_stirwg_
>>>>certificates_pull_5&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7
>>>>ItG0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=72Ta2iS7yNcl-FC
>>>>R5HdvXB5njEfC12k0kLz7QgCp87g&e=
>>>> 
>>>> What do people think?
>>>> 
>>>> spt
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> stir mailing list
>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>> 
>>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailm
>>>>an_listinfo_stir&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7ItG
>>>>0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=NSOnsQJ832JfPXkcoe
>>>>qf68PvPzxIr21SPbpPP4dg270&e=
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> stir mailing list
>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> stir mailing list
>>> stir@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> stir mailing list
>> stir@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>
>_______________________________________________
>stir mailing list
>stir@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir