> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam
> Roach
>
> Ah, so this argues for the media-path identity. I don't have as strong
> an opinion on that yet. My (possibly naive) first impression is that it
> has no better chance of surviving the SBC sausage factory any more than
> 4474 does (given that SBCs tend to sit on the media path, too).

Well, it certainly has a "better" chance.  I mean we *know* 4474 won't survive 
*any* SBC, purely by definition of what an SBC does to be an SBC.  I *know* 
this draft will survive *some* deployed SBCs.  So it's a "better" chance.  How 
many it can survive across I don't know.  For example I do know of deployed 
SBC's even this PASS mechanism won't survive.  (and I'm not talking about 
particular vendors - I know some providers do modify the PAI)

I'm guessing it also has a better chance of surviving more b2bua's in general 
(not just SBC's) than 4474 would.

But there's no doubt it's a gamble.  I'm just trying to make the odds as good 
as possible while still having some payback.


> But this doesn't give any rationale for signing P-Asserted-Identity
> (which will need to be stripped off as it leaves the enterprise,
> rendering your use case pretty much moot).

Huh?  It doesn't need to be stripped on leaving nor entering the Enterprise.  
You lost me.

-hadriel
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to