Dale Worley wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 22:09 +0000, Scott Lawrence wrote:
>> On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 15:03 -0500, Dale Worley wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 11:26 -0500, Lawrence, Scott (BL60:9D30) wrote:
>>>>> If the proxy is already authorizing the request, could we not just
>>>>> check the p-asserted identity signature in the message instead of
>>>>> challenging it again?
>>>> As long as the PAI header signature is associated with the callid I see
>>>> no reason not to... is the PAI signature time-limited?
>>> If we're going to treat PAI as equivalent to Authorization, why
>>> shouldn't we treat PAI, Authorization, and Proxy-Authorization as
>>> equivalent?
>> I'd like to preserve the ability to write things independently of our
>> equivalences.  The sipXtackLib support for authentication should
>> implement good practice for a SIP implementation, which includes knowing
>> which authorization headers you asked for and therefor which you attend
>> to.  
>>
>> PAI is by defintion domain-specific, and so it's reasonable (and
>> efficient) for our services to take advantage of it when it's present.  
> 
> It sounds like the correct solution is to have two levels of functions:
> 
> One function(s) is the current get-authorization-info function, which
> extracts a specified value from the specified type of header.
> 
> The other function(s) should encapsulate "how a proxy (or server) tests
> the authentication/authorization of a message", and would take into
> account sipX's equivalence of the three headers.  (This has the
> advantage that we can factor out all that code in all the components,
> and ensure that they work consistently.)
> 
> Can we nicely encapsulate all that logic so as to build the second
> function?
> 

I agree with this. If there are no objections, I will go ahead and make the 
changes to the RLS and Status Server.

Arjun
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev

Reply via email to