IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [straw] draft-straw-sip-traceroute-00

Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com> Sat, 20 July 2013 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D424921F9970 for <straw@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.503
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.503 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.096, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xUxR1-LOAKuN for <straw@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F52821F9E7C for <straw@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r6KEhU3F030881 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:43:30 GMT
Received: from userz7022.oracle.com (userz7022.oracle.com [156.151.31.86]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6KEhTvE007223 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:43:29 GMT
Received: from abhmt118.oracle.com (abhmt118.oracle.com [141.146.116.70]) by userz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6KEhSjc017122; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:43:28 GMT
Received: from [192.168.1.108] (/66.31.4.117) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:43:28 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <576A8B541C219D4E9CEB1DF8C19C7B88196BD0F4@MBX07.citservers.local>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:43:25 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <53AA7A9D-0C5F-4E2A-B554-9767523B06DD@oracle.com>
References: <20130715025957.14214.78161.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CCF95343-A61C-48B3-AF57-8A05CD466498@oracle.com> <51E436DD.7020208@alum.mit.edu> <57AD32EC-09E1-4A48-8E4A-0805B3219DDD@oracle.com> <51E46D97.5040802@alum.mit.edu> <95591D74-52E9-47C3-97FC-1E52201CDAC2@oracle.com> <51E56F20.7060707@alum.mit.edu> <576A8B541C219D4E9CEB1DF8C19C7B88196BD0F4@MBX07.citservers.local>
To: Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]
Cc: "straw@ietf.org" <straw@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [straw] draft-straw-sip-traceroute-00
X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" <straw.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/straw>, <mailto:straw-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/straw>
List-Post: <mailto:straw@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:straw-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw>, <mailto:straw-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:43:39 -0000

On Jul 19, 2013, at 2:25 PM, Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com> wrote:

> As I mentioned within the following link, using the Reason header (or the other listed options) sounds okay to me.
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/straw/current/msg00131.html

Ahh, sorry missed that - I saw the email and my brain shut off when I saw "RFC 5373". :)


> Other than providing two ways to communicate the same thing, do we need both mechanisms?  For instance, are customers/vendors actually wanting/needing both options?  Should the draft provide even more options so that it can work with even more middle boxes without requiring code/configuration modification?

I don't know if vendors care either way - do you?  I don't.  I think doing two ways is already a bit silly but possibly justifiable for other reasons than to get through middleboxes; doing three or more would look crazy. :)

-hadriel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email