This is somehow tied with Jonathan's thread related to retargetting and downgrading from sips to sip (or upgrading). If we agree to disallow both, then we are also disallowing what is being discussed in this thread.
If a UAS wants to be contactable with over UDP or TCP/TLS, then it can register with 2 contact headers. Hisham On 10/04/07, Francois Audet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Rescorla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 13:22 > To: Dean Willis > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Sip] SIPS question: How to prevent plaintext > requests from being delivered to a UA > > > All of these, taken together, say to me that it is > reasonable for a user > > who is handed a business card with only a SIPS URI on it to > guess an > > equivalent SIP URI and use it, and that the infrastructure > will route > > this request to the UAS. If that UAS is NOT using > "outbound", then the > > last hop may well be traversed without TLS. > > Well, I don't agree with this interpretation, but luckily since > we're writing the spec rather than interpretating it, we don't > have to engage in a lot of exegesis. I assert that if you're > given only SIPS URI you MUST NOT attempt to map it to a SIP > URI. Is there anyone who disagrees with this? If not, then > why don't you propose some language that you believe would make > this clear. I agree with Eric. I will clarify. _______________________________________________ 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
