Dean, This sounds like an excellent way to proceed. I'll generate some candidate text and send it to the list in the next few days.
-Ekr On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Dean Willis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We've gotten stuck on a fine point in DTLS-SRTP. > > The current draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework-01 uses an RFC 4474 Identity > header to preserve the integrity of the media key's fingerprint, thereby > detecting a certain class of MITM attack. > > However, RFC 4474 Identity headers are of questionable validity when used > with protocol gateways or B2BUAs. More or less, they're capable of > asserting the identity of the gateway, not the identity of the calling > party. But the recipient has no real way to figure out which is which. > > We've debated at some length, and with no good result, about whether we > should try and fix RFC 4474. We've had some suggestions that may work for > B2BUAs, and some other suggestions that may work for gateways, but we > certainly don't have a consensus. > > That leaves our chartered deliverable of DTLS-SRTP hanging, and the > milestone has gone past months ago. > > Here's a proposal: > > We add a caveat about the limitation of RFC 4474 to > draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework and go ahead and advance that > specification. If somebody later decides to fix RFC 4474, they can do so, > and if necessary update DTLS-SRTP if needed. > > > Does that work for everybody? > > If we agree to it, I suggest that we move the date for WGLC of > draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework to July 2008, and move the milestone for > delivery of that doc to the IESG into September. > > -- > Dean > _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://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
