Re: [stir] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-stir-rph-emergency-services-02

Brian Rosen <> Thu, 06 August 2020 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99FAC3A0DAF for <>; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zYuTKwQfy_Ug for <>; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:32:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1AC03A0DAE for <>; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id s189so43392321iod.2 for <>; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 11:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=KjFhjprC8gZejSRfDVXnvxHLpnaWQJT7FkFtDCgVFmQ=; b=OprzI9b8icY/4FgKluuBtFPBQp9sUy5O4dlRkmf/S18iwpdEM8LKrw5ZKu+cCVSLtS TSVYXPW4lAGuiMQ8yjSeUwbED/aBRGwBEGjdXEDninbyeabIRWWyMncuYNm4d5lXaKHD WDEimbuVq5gHJ49dvUuXf8mBnjEsS3M84lEvslTWdx3hggD4btJzUms2BnhynV75FkmN f1J74RwSDDIES938X7n2kzxyH+WbMZOQaa5LqJ2db/e5laAzrx9GsdcjfPBss4uWuuNg 8nXlMqrWcDr3Q/3KggVYKNIuZelqP1HOoX2Rwvg/4Gv/D+q7lExAcsjrXBVAkBab7wqC +yhw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=KjFhjprC8gZejSRfDVXnvxHLpnaWQJT7FkFtDCgVFmQ=; b=XdPvzR0HT2zoJMneTElaLvTr4E4qTeaoqSHnjizbj6oJytC5+DCowH6WMqA30dNBr5 SyBGmq6k2zZyrqe85X5wBdARpm09Evb1hdErDdlmFJFidzUx58eDHFBbPvslAQU7EGA3 9lZvbVRBxPdgrafN87cQWSBRggBngwSywYzqE1utaySA1T8bDhSD1GIAHam9OCXLXGeu 3lEV0b3+fVTK93ILwdxy1N1rhb24MKlmE//+GYKanU3xCR5k5YCmFzxTJyl1JBQbnHkd CRiUufjxe/w8QakhvXn+gKztY1gUszNFsOpnWSLZr57TvtNkmk8j1wim096v/c31n3Uw bgkw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532JTJShsCbNRl2RzgosBfS8DiCYRF0ko/BM9A92/rXs9dYA9WSa 4yeNSrge2pj4P46BoJ3w5KaDNa4kmJU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzHPi0Ott17ANdKAxOcV63ZSdTEYiuM2M8o7c35/J0AIVo29yeHuCiv9o0dQjrm+rLywj0/VA==
X-Received: by 2002:a5e:c311:: with SMTP id a17mr359493iok.12.1596738733172; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 11:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brians-mbp-2871.lan ( []) by with ESMTPSA id m14sm4716683ild.4.2020. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Aug 2020 11:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
From: Brian Rosen <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:32:10 -0400
Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <>
To: Russ Housley <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [stir] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-stir-rph-emergency-services-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2020 18:32:16 -0000

We need to make a decision on what to reference for the emergency stuff.  I currently references my explanatory draft.  We discussed in the meeting on the rcd topic the proper separation of the stir mechanism that defines the PASSporT and the SIP mechanism that shows how it’s used.  I will definitely create and push through a sip mechanism draft updating RFC6881 to cover how we use RPH and Priority.  But should I push the explanatory draft through to an RFC so we can reference it?  I’m thinking not.  If that’s what we decide, then the reference would be to the mechanism document.

The reference to urn:service:sos is RFC5031.

Section 3.2 “When using "EScallback" as the "rph" assertion value, the "orig" claim of the PASSporT MUST represent the emergency network telephone  number. “  No idea what “emergency network telephone number is”.  Maybe “the telephone number used by the emergency services for call back, or a country or region specific dial string”.  I believe that won’t conflict with any text on authority (i.e. who has authority for a dial string would be determined by the same authorities who handle telephone numbers in a country or region). 

Other than that, I’ve reviewed it and think it’s ready to go.


> On Jul 31, 2020, at 11:29 AM, Russ Housley <> wrote:
> This is the STIR WG Last Call for "Assertion Values for a Resource Priority Header Claim and a SIP Priority Header Claim in Support of Emergency Services Networks” <draft-ietf-stir-rph-emergency-services-02>.  Please review the document and send your comments to the STIR WG mail list by 22 August 2020.
> Thanks,
> Robert & Russ
> _______________________________________________
> stir mailing list