[Uri-review] Proposal: sip6 URI scheme

Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl> Thu, 26 April 2012 09:19 UTC

Return-Path: <rick@openfortress.nl>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB42E21F87C5; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.61
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id stxEaMmmFAyi; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fame.vanrein.org (openfortress.nl []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F103121F87B6; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phantom.vanrein.org (phantom.vanrein.org []) by fame.vanrein.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C1E4040D1; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:19:04 +0100 (BST)
Received: by phantom.vanrein.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3DBB42255C; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:27:25 +0000 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:27:25 +0000
From: Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>
To: uri-review@ietf.org, sipcore@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120426092725.GC27002@newphantom.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q"
Content-Disposition: inline
X-My-Coolest-Hack: http://rick.vanrein.org/linux/badram -> Exploit broken RAM
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Subject: [Uri-review] 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 09:19:07 -0000


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.  Using this, end users
and their tools should have an easier time deciding whether or not to
use the URI.

A similar thing applies to enforced ZRTP --being sure before calling
that the call will be private-- and I combined that with the URI scheme
proposal, so as not to register more URI schemes than required.

Your feedback is kindly welcomed.

Best wishes,

Rick van Rein