Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> As far as I know, both true E.164 and those that "look like" E.164 are being
> changed, as well as NANP/local-exchange format, emergency code, and some
> cellular-specific number formats, etc. To be honest I really believe a lot
> of these truly are E.164 or non-local-scope numbers in nature/meaning, and
> just aren't using the exact format one would want. In other words it's as
> Paul says "do what I mean, not what I say".
>
> Really some of the rules are pretty simplistic, including even just change it
> regardless of username format. But I would consider those just bad and need
> to be corrected, and will if email-style URI's start showing up.
>
> Really though I don't think there's much/any email-style URIs crossing
> provider borders. (inside Enterprises or within a provider may be, but that
> doesn't need rfc4474) Or maybe it's just my particular customers, or my kind
> of customers. I dunno. I find everyone on the IETF list has a different
> view of SIP, because they represent different users/markets.
I expect you might get a different story from Microsoft. (But then they
probably aren't a customer of yours.)
That is what I meant about it being two different worlds. Each world has
its own set of SPs. And they aren't very good at peering with one another.
Paul
> -hadriel
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Elwell, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 6:39 AM
>> To: Hadriel Kaplan; IETF SIP List
>> Subject: RE: [Sip] New I-D on why From/To-URIs are changed at provider
>> borders
>>
>> Hadriel,
>>
>> Thanks for this draft. One comments:
>>
>> When talking about changing the host part of SIP URIs, are you referring
>> just to SIP URIs containing an E.164 number in telephone-subscriber
>> format (e.g.: [EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone)? Or are you also
>> talking about other forms of URI that look like E.164 number (e.g.,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED])? Presumably you are not talking about email
>> style URIs.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Hadriel Kaplan
>>> Sent: 18 February 2008 20:20
>>> To: IETF SIP List
>>> Subject: [Sip] New I-D on why From/To-URIs are changed at
>>> provider borders
>>>
>>> As part of an off-line discussion regarding Kai Fischer's
>>> draft on e2e-security-media and whether his From-URI copying
>>> tactic would succeed or not at a policy level, if rfc4474
>>> fails to do so, I gave my 2 cents on what some providers had
>>> been telling me. Dan asked me to write up a draft on it, in
>>> case people are interested. This is the draft:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kaplan-sip-uris-chan
>>> ge-00.txt
>>>
>>> -hadriel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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
