> -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 3:08 PM > > Now, let's imagine a world in which we take on > draft-kaplan-sip-asserter-identity as a working group item, and publish > it as an RFC. Over then following several years, it sees a relatively > high level of deployment. Are we to imagine that "P-Original-To" won't > be hijacked by the same kinds of systems that currently hijack "To" to > mean something other than it should? Sorry, I can't suspend my disbelief > that far.
Yup, that's possible. It's possible for anything we do, no doubt. But there is a difference: we're starting with it being signed. If it becomes popular and people start hijacking and mucking with it, the signature fails, and they will be introducing call failures or errors into a previously working deployed system. Customers don't like to introduce failures into an already working deployed system (the Spice must flow). Today if you try to do 4474 and it breaks, you're the one introducing errors into a working deployed system. -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
