Re: [Uri-review] [sipcore] Proposal: sip6 URI scheme

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 26 April 2012 09:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C888D21F8568 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.048, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 VvgIrfvM8Fmy for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241D021F8566 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so856173vbb.31 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=IpIxdypSgTToCzKKR0ihGFP73kDdG7ytFL4LPKsE4oI=; b=esgKuHCWfCAS0DQR1rxgUrG5ysBERHOW31Hzx1BVBLlG54RDvRy5OSX6LEy0BwQcOU r4rbSyGERDu+U9yvy2yerqsHKIm40/fnY66x0PRJgpCg/g286rDwEUIQ+6yTGGxOVbu/ a9JjqQksXNKxMUesiipdW6THDNG/umGJETjZbc8yJmipxD2fd6wC2tpHfsAJa1z0poqo zYBO0HSOMA6EmY8/b2ygu9Uz5qKC1h5pRM9m6Ez37KPYXvARWKVS7kLNThnAETdG2HMy tNkrG3l44gHVZ+goBFRPCo91QqxgrGK153ajeU+Dlth+7vF2Klm0zDh5aTc6TNNe1gGw h8/w==
Received: by 10.52.15.233 with SMTP id a9mr5435290vdd.34.1335432672636; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.107.199 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:30:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120426092725.GC27002@newphantom.local>
References: <20120426092725.GC27002@newphantom.local>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:30:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfndmpvV5-hnS1UiGoRWCf8sGd2EzSTq+VskO+cL7F2CzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmCN2VcEA6SdyLukQTXlex7iaOtU+/ykBxOmQT29FbWhkihOtaSMvVP36A8hV9zQScGpJuY
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 04:22:18 -0700
Cc: uri-review@ietf.org, sipcore@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] [sipcore] Proposal: sip6 URI scheme
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:31:13 -0000

2012/4/26 Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>nl>:
> I am developing to get better support for SIP over IPv6.  One of the
> problems that I have encountered is the interoperability between
> endpoints that run only IPv4 or IPv6.  To solve this situations prior
> to call setup, I am proposing a sip6 URI scheme.

Hi Rick, I'm pretty sure that's not the way to go. As Olle pointed out
a SIP URI with domain could point, after RFC 3263 resolution, to many
transport:address:port, some of them could be IPv4 and others IPv6.

Your proposal would indeed break existing implementations.

If for example alice uses just IPv4 and bob just IPv6, and both use
and register in a proxy/registrar with IP dual stack, alice should be
able to call bob's AoR (sip:bob@example.net) without knowing that bob
is using IPv6 or not. This is already possible with current specs but
it would be not possible with your proposal.

Regards.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>