Takuya,

Thanks a lot for your emails. Yes. I assume everyone, including 
the caller and callee are in the trusted domain, though I don't know if
this makes sense. We may say that a caller or callee can never be trusted:)

To my understanding from the RFC 3325, "Privacy: id" is only used when
sending the INVITE to a untrusted domain, that would make you to remove the 
P-Asserted-ID header?

Regards,

Li Li 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Takuya Sawada [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 8:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RE: [Sip] SIP Privacy draft
> 
> 
> I assumed that the caller and the calle are outside of the 
> trusted domain.
> If caller, callee and everything in between is trusted, as in your 
> original mail, then Cullen's answer may be sufficient enough.
> 
> Regards,
> Takuya
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > According to RFC3325, as described in section 7, the caller
> > should add "Privacy:id" if it wants caller id privacy service.
> > Of course, I think, service providers can offer the service 
> to the caller
> > that is provisioned to be anonymous to the callee by default,
> > or with other means, if no Privacy header is present in the request.
> > 
> > P-Preferred-Identity header is irrelevant to privacy 
> service, I think.
> > P-Preferred-Identiy header will be removed at the first proxy which
> > authenticates the request and populates P-Asserted-Identity 
> header(s),
> > accordingly.
> > 
> >  From header should be anonymous. According to RFC3261 
> section 8.1.1.3,
> > the displayname should be "Anonymous" and URI should be a 
> syntactically 
> > correct but meaningless URI like sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > In RFC3398 section 12.1, there is an example of anonymous From like;
> >   From: Anonymous <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> > I think we should use at least invalid TLD which the receiver can 
> > safely know it is invalid URI.
> > 
> > Proxy will remove P-Asserted-Identiy header(s) if 
> Privacy:id is present,
> > when it sends the request to the untrusted party.
> > Then, the caller's identity will not be shown at the callee.
> > We need every SIP entity in between to have trusty relationship, 
> > possibly defined Spec(T).
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Takuya
> > 
> > > Using rfc 3325, if I want to do a feature of "Caller Id 
> presentation 
> > > restriction", how should I do it, assuming caller, callee 
> and everything 
> > > in between is trusted? The caller should place a 
> P-Preferred-ID in the 
> > > INVITE message that has "anonymous" in the display field and also
> > > use "anonymous" in the display field in the "from" header?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Li Li 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:23 AM
> > > > To: 'Li Li'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: RE: [Sip] SIP Privacy draft
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It became RFC 3325
> > > > 
> > > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3325.txt
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> > > > > Behalf Of Li Li
> > > > > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 6:39 AM
> > > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > > > Subject: [Sip] SIP Privacy draft
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can anybody help me to understand what happened to the 
> > > > > privay draft that had the remote-party-ID header? Is 
> > > > > it completely obsoleted? Or is it moved to some other 
> > > > > draft? RFC 3323 does not include such header operation 
> > > > > mechanism. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Li Li
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Burnside, Andrew 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 8:49 AM
> > > > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > > > > Subject: [Sip] Inter-domain QoS with SIP
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I am currently looking at options for providing QoS managed
> > > > > > inter-domain
> > > > > > connections using SIP. This will probably be in a DiffServ 
> > > > > > architecture,
> > > > > > with aggregated flows between domains where possible. Has 
> > > > > > there been much
> > > > > > work done in this area with SIP? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I saw that Henry Sinnreich had an Internet Draft out on this
> > > > > > topic back in
> > > > > > 2000, though I can't find any references to 
> subsequent work.  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Andrew Burnside 
> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> > > > > > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> > > > > > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions 
> on current sip
> > > > > > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the 
> > > > application of sip
> > > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> > > > > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> > > > > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current 
> > > > > sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the 
> > > > > application of sip
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
> > 
> > 
> > --------
> > Takuya Sawada
> > KDDI Corporation (KDDI)
> > KDDI Bldg. 2-3-2 Nishishinjuku Shinjuku-ku, 
> > Tokyo 163-8003, Japan
> > Tel: +81-3-3347-7406
> > Fax: +81-3-3347-7418
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
> 
> 
> --------
> Takuya Sawada
> KDDI Corporation (KDDI)
> KDDI Bldg. 2-3-2 Nishishinjuku Shinjuku-ku, 
> Tokyo 163-8003, Japan
> Tel: +81-3-3347-7406
> Fax: +81-3-3347-7418
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to