Rick Dean wrote:
>
> Thank you Jonathan.
>
> How ironic you cite the need to minimize user entry problems.
> Our interface is limited, and our end users are unfamiliar,
> so we are as sensitive or more to the need of entering multiple
> username/passwords. Without a username context this
> is less possible when calling multiple realms.
> Alternatively, the username would likely need to become
> a full length globalized number (like +18475551212) or nearly so.
In general, I would strongly recommend that people adopt the convention
of using the full username ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for the authentication
user name, rather than a local name (alice). For
limited-input-functionality devices, it's basically impossible to enter
a new name for each domain, and clearly a user-name-only approach
doesn't work due to collisions. This also allows for a reasonable
default value, namely the From name, again simplifying user data entry
and minimizing confusion.
Obviously, the user should be able to enter whatever legal string is
allowed by the protocol; this is just an operational and default
recommendation, not a license to second-guess users.
> If a visitor enters a globalized number and the phone appends
> the wrong domain this would be fairly broken.
>
> Cheers,
> Rick
> 3Com
--
Henning Schulzrinne http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
