Andrew: Thanks for pointing it out. I missed the change as well. Honestly, one of the main use cases for BLA/SLA was to address a boss/secretary scenario. In these cases, the secretary is really monitoring a "Boss" extension; so from a "ownership" purpose, the AoR is really that of the boss and not a "common" address.
Venkatesh On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:53 AM, Hutton, Andrew < [email protected]> wrote: > > Indeed this getting interesting. > > In version -02 the REGISTER in section 10.1 showed a normal 1st party > registration by alice but -03 shows a third party registration which is > a significant change. > > I must admit I missed the text in -02 which stated "Bob and Alice are in > an appearance group identified by Alice's AOR. Bob REGISTERs using > contact sip:[email protected] <sip%[email protected]>" and I should > have commented on that > earlier. > > As the draft is about sharing appearances of a single AOR then surely > third party registration is not necessary as it could be that there is > simply two helpdesk phones using a single AOR and there is no "alice" or > "bob" AOR's. So in the simplest case the REGISTER would be: > > REGISTER sip:registrar.example.com SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP ua1.example.com;branch=z9hG4bK527b54da8ACC7B09 > From: <sip:[email protected] <sip%[email protected]> > >;tag=CDF9A668-909E2BDD > To: <sip:[email protected] <sip%[email protected]>> > CSeq: 2 REGISTER > Call-ID: d3281184-518783de-cc23d6bb > Contact: <sip:[email protected] <sip%[email protected]>> > > Regards > Andy > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > >On Behalf Of Francois Audet > >Sent: 14 July 2009 23:30 > >To: Alan Johnston > >Cc: [email protected] > >Subject: [BLISS] draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances: > >Provisioningconsiderations > > > > > >> > Section 9: > >> > > >> > Delete first paragraph. > >> > > >> > Clarify the UA also REGISTERs to the AOR. Discuss the > >> security implications, i.e., > >> > you either use the same shared username/password, or you > >> use a different username/password > >> > for HTTP digest, per user. Perhaps the security > >> considerations can be described in section 15. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> I added text about authorization for third party registrations and > >> publication. A little more text on this would be helpful. > > > >Ah-ah... Now we are getting down to business. > > > >I am now looking at new section 10.1 on registration, and I see that > >you are using indeed third-party registration (with To=HelpDesk, > >From=Alice). > > > >So, this would be one way to to it. > > > >Another way would be to NOT use third-party registration at all. In > >other words, Alice would send a first party registration on behalf > >of HelpDesk (ie.., To=HelpDesk, From=Alice). > > > >Wouldn't that work? > > > >Then there is the whole issue of authentication with HTTP-Digest. > >I guess one could use username="HelpDesk". In this case, the > >idea is that > >Alice would need to know the credentials for HelpDesk. > >Another way would be to use username="alice" instead (i.e., > >her own credentials). > >The decisions on which authentication you use would depend on > >need of the > >administrator. > > > >Have you tought about this? Am I off based? > >_______________________________________________ > >BLISS mailing list > >[email protected] > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss > > > _______________________________________________ > BLISS mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss >
_______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
