RFC 3325 did not explicitly say anything much about the responses, but there was text in RFC 3325 that did signify responses. We have discussed this in the past, you have your view and I have mine - but please not not state that it is explicitly covered because that is not true. regards Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx > [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 2:09 AM > To: sipping > Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-update-pai-07 > > > I like this version it seems to have resolved many of the > things I was worried about. > > One significant thing... > > Saying you can use PAI to authenticate registrations seems > like an update to 3261 not 3325. This seems like a pretty big > change to SIP security. I also have a hard time imagining the > type of UA that would both need to register, and were in the > Trust Domain. > > Nits. > > I don't recall 3325 being unclear on use of PAI in responses. It > explicitly did not define it - there not much unclear about that. > > Cullen in my individual contributor roll > _______________________________________________ > Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping > This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP > Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip > Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP > _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
