Sounds reasonable to me.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 18:44 > To: Paul Kyzivat > Cc: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); IETF SIP List > Subject: Re: [Sip] New I-D on RFC4474 and phone numbers > > Actually what I am hoping to do is to just clearly document > the applicability of RFC4474 to numbers and be much crisper > with guidance on when to use it, when to not, what it buys > you with numbers (since it does help a little even then - > receivers can know the domain that asserts that number and > use blacklists/whitelists to judge trustability). > > I also want to make sure we are not basing SRTP security on > integrity properties delivered with RFC4474, when said > properties aren't really delivered so well with phone numbers. > > -Jonathan R. > > Paul Kyzivat wrote: > > > > > > Francois Audet wrote: > >> I think we might be talking about two different aspects. > >> > >> For "phone numbers", I agree with you that parity is ok. > >> > >> For "email-looking addresses", I believe the bar is higher (and we > >> have it already with 4474). > > > > OK. THen we aren't far apart. I agree we want and have something > > better for email-style addresses where the domain is > significant. It > > is the "phone number" addresses I am concerned with here. I > think we > > must have parity, and ideally better when the PSTN isn't involved. > > > > Paul > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, > >>> February 19, 2008 11:58 > >>> To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055) > >>> Cc: Jonathan Rosenberg; IETF SIP List > >>> Subject: Re: [Sip] New I-D on RFC4474 and phone numbers > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Francois Audet wrote: > >>>> I'm not sure I agree with that. > >>>> > >>>> I think we want something that is better than the PSTN. I > >>> just don't > >>>> think it's the right question to ask. > >>> I certainly *want* something better than PSTN. But > perhaps we don't > >>> *need* that. I think we do *need* something "as good as" the PSTN. > >>> > >>> But perhaps the first order of business is to come to > agreement on > >>> what we need. > >> > > > > -- > Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 499 Thornall St. > Cisco Fellow Edison, NJ 08837 > Cisco, Voice Technology Group > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (408) 902-3084 > http://www.cisco.com > _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list http://www.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
