Same here. I think the document needs a bit of work, but it's a good start.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 08:17 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Sip] Certificate authentication in SIP > > Hi, > > I think certificate authentication would be a valuable > addition to SIP's arsenal of authentication methods, to > better support environments where certificates can be > deployed, in a similar way as RFCs 3310 and 4169 were done to > support SIM-based authentication. > > So, I would support adding the topic as a charter item and > adopting the > requirements draft as a WG item as the starting point. > > Markus > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: ext DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: 13 June, 2007 18:58 > >To: IETF SIP List > >Subject: [Sip] Certificate authentication in SIP > > > >(As WG chair) > > > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dotson-sip-certificat > >e-auth-03 > >.txt > > > >Describes a set of requirements for: > > > > This document defines requirements for adding certificate > > authentication to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This > > document is being presented with the intention of providing clear > > requirements to any potential solutions specifying certificate > > authentication within SIP networks. Supporting certificate > > authentication in SIP would provide strong authentication and > > increase the types of possible deployment scenarios. > > > >(Before we go any further, please forget all about the solutions > >document - that comes later and we are not dealing with it now) > > > >We need to decide whether there is support for a body of > work in this > >area, and therefore whether we should charter some > requirements work in > >the SIP WG. > > > >(Because this is security related we have agreed that SIP does the > >requirements drafting and not SIPPING) > > > >So can I hear opinions of the WG on: > > > >- whether this represents a problem space that the working group > >should draft requirements on? > > > >- whether the problem space exists but is something slightly > >different, and if so what is that problem space? > > > >- whether there is a more general problem that the security area > >should be addressing, rather than the SIP group addressing something > >specific? > > > >- based on your answers to the first three questions, whether this > >draft is essentially in the right direction to be adopted as the WG > >draft assuming we create the charter item, or whether we > need to seek > >some other input draft? > > > >- and finally, whether (assuming we go ahead with this work) there > >is any work in any other IETF WG that we should take account of? > > > > > >Regards > > > >Keith > > > > > > > >Regards > > > >Keith > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 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
