Cullen, I don't believe this would fall in SIP, because it does not discuss a new mechanism to authenticate responses. (I thought about doing that, but that would have zero chance of getting deployed, whereas what I describe is basically already deployed) If you mean discussion of allowing or asserting PAI for responses within a Trust Domain is out of SIPPING's purview in general, then I'll move it to SIP. Though I'm not sure how that could be the case given the current update-pai draft is in SIPPING, and this whole thing is informational for private domain use anyway. -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:fluffy@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 1:27 PM > > Please note the appropriate places to discuss SIP security mechanisms > such as authentication of responses is the SIP WG. Discussing > requirements for PAI header field in responses is a fine thing to do > in the SIPPING WG. I have not really looked at draft to see what sort > of category it falls into - I suspect it is more SIPPING that SIP - > but I wanted to provide clarity on where SIP security mechanisms were > currently being done so the authors could choose the right WG. > > Cullen <RAI AD> _______________________________________________ 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
