Hi, Please also keep in mind that CANCEL is hop-to-hop, so if someone inserts a Reason header in the request there is no guarantee that the next hop will forward it. Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx > [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 > Sent: 3. maaliskuuta 2009 11:07 > To: Christer Holmberg; Victor Pascual Ávila; Hadriel Kaplan > Cc: sipping@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: New Internet Draft for Caller Identity Blocking > > Hi Christer > > The caller identity blocking could be offered as a > supplementary service - something like Enhanced Incoming > Communication Barring. The users can subscribe to this just > as they subscribe to any other service. > So as part of this service execution, the proxy or CSCF needs > to look for the Reason header in the incoming CANCEL or BYE > requests and if found should pick the mentioned identity and > add the identity to the user's black list. > > Now say based on this service Alice blocks Bob and the proxy > parses the BYE message with Reason header, then the proxy > adds Bob's identity to Alice's black list. Now when Bob calls > Alice, then Proxy looks into Alice's black list and since > Bob's identity is present, sends a 4xx (e.g blocked user) > response to Bob indicating that Alice blocked Bob. > > In the CR I submitted to 22.173 for enhanced ICB, I mentioned > that the Proxy or server can store details like Actual > Identity, Published Identity, Reason for block, duration of > block for a particular user. Now these details can be > standardized as part of a event package and then can be used > to notify the users of blocked calls using SUBCRIBE / NOTIFY > procedures and XCAP. > > > Regards > Ranjit > > -----Original Message----- > From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx > [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 1:53 PM > To: Victor Pascual Ávila; Hadriel Kaplan > Cc: sipping@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: New Internet Draft for Caller Identity Blocking > > > Hi, > > >>Some other comments on your draft: > >>1) You show the Reason header being removed by the Proxy. > While that may make sense for some cases, for being out on > vacation it does not - I *want* the UAC to see it. > > > >I believe the header can reveal sensitive information for an > attacker: > >permanent blocking vs temporal blocking (and the expires). > > How does I know that there will be a proxy that supports the > extension in the first place, and that would remove the > header from the CAN/BYE/4xx? If no proxy supports the > extension the Reason header may be passed all the way to the UAC... > > Regards, > > Christer > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
