I suspect the President of Brazil would be very interested in a BCP on
Mandatory to Use TLS for SIP. :-) 

 But the Government of Brazil has the Authority to Act as a protocol police,
the IETF does not. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Stephen Farrell
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 6:59 PM
To: Peterson, Jon; Richard Shockey; 'perpass'
Subject: Re: [perpass] mandatory-to-implement vs. more?



On 10/09/2013 11:44 PM, Peterson, Jon wrote:
> A BCP could
> however provide the necessary motivation for using TLS in the 
> situations where it will actually help, and the recent revelations 
> make that case rather eloquently.

I'm confused by that a bit - given the GCHQ/Belgacom example, in which
situations would running SIP over TLS never help?

Note that I've not yet argued for MTU at all, so that's a real question.

S.
_______________________________________________
perpass mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass

_______________________________________________
perpass mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass

Reply via email to