[stir] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01.txt
Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Tue, 24 July 2018 17:48 UTC
Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.com>
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 1D57A130E80; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.779
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.779 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=standardstrack.com
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 dwJ64yYcq5JE; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from biz221.inmotionhosting.com (biz221.inmotionhosting.com [23.235.223.233]) (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 A1B8F130E20; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=standardstrack.com; s=default; h=Message-Id:To:Cc:References:Date:Subject: Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=i9vjSash3+obE7IdZptAbc8IuDb3H88KUcNh61jM17g=; b=jT9UkH8nsUoC+AWJNBj1ypciBw GitLJUBoA1ScmnW5pSd6nrsL9QQ/7q0oOyLdkwax6eUM6n4uapfxuGcYUcukl0rLcRNiki1N6pExr //iolk+VNsRFSbUx9UJybrD/xsNeb3gnSHWSWH+J7mMXMwH8ldSz4QDxssO5gaSrtZgU=;
Received: from [68.100.196.217] (port=55442 helo=[192.168.10.26]) by biz221.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1fi1QA-007Hg5-L9; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:48:34 -0700
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6EA411FC-BAA9-4A08-88EC-A82A998A0527"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 13:48:25 -0400
References: <153237657992.20311.16576998112600185738.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: stir@ietf.org
To: sipcore@ietf.org
Message-Id: <9D50BEED-10A6-40E9-8DC5-7336A3A28239@standardstrack.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz221.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: biz221.inmotionhosting.com: authenticated_id: eburger+standardstrack.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Authenticated-Sender: biz221.inmotionhosting.com: eburger@standardstrack.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/xH0K1TbRBaY3ig14LQsRQ5KSbgM>
Subject: [stir] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01.txt
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 17:48:36 -0000
[Please keep discussion on the sipcore list. Thanks!] Changes from -00: Mostly editorial, including all but one of Tonga’s suggestions and cleaning up some of the ASCII art. Included the Feature-Caps header in the example. Included an example of an audio announcement. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01.txt > Date: July 23, 2018 at 4:09:39 PM EDT > To: "Eric W. Burger" <eburger@standardstrack.com>, "Eric Burger" <eburger@standardstrack.com> > > > A new version of I-D, draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01.txt > has been successfully submitted by Eric W. Burger and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-burger-sipcore-rejected > Revision: 01 > Title: A Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Response Code for Rejected Calls > Document date: 2018-07-23 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 15 > URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01.txt > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burger-sipcore-rejected/ > Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01 > Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-burger-sipcore-rejected > Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-burger-sipcore-rejected-01 > > Abstract: > This document defines the 608 (Rejected) SIP response code. This > response code enables calling parties to learn their call was > rejected by an intermediary and will not be answered. As a 6xx code, > the caller will be aware that future attempts to contact the same UAS > will be likely to fail. The present use case driving the need for > the 608 response code is when the intermediary is an analytics > engine. In this case, the rejection is by a machine or other > process. This contrasts with the 607 (Unwanted) SIP response code, > which a human at the target UAS indicated the call was not wanted. > In some jurisdictions this distinction is important and may have > additional requirements beyond the 607 response code. Specifically, > this document defines the use of the Call-Info header in 608 > responses to enable rejected callers to contact entities that blocked > their calls in error. > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > The IETF Secretariat >