sip  

Messages by Date

• 2009/04/07 [Sip] I-D Action:draft-ietf-sip-ua-privacy-07.txt Internet-Drafts
• 2009/04/07 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/06 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/06 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/06 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/06 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case John C Klensin
• 2009/04/05 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/04 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/04 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/04 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/04 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/03 [Sip] RFC 5479 on Requirements and Analysis of Media Security Management Protocols rfc-editor
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] My take on where we are with Identity Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Victor Pascual Ávila
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/03 [Sip] My take on where we are with Identity Elwell, John
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/03 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Keith Moore
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Munjo Yu
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Media vs Signaling identity (was Re: francois' comments andwhy RFC4474 not used in the field) Elwell, John
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/02 [Sip] Mlab Tools [email protected]
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field [email protected]
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dwight, Timothy M (Tim)
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Draft new version: draft-ietf-sip-199-07 Christer Holmberg
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Keith Moore
• 2009/04/02 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Keith Moore
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Christer Holmberg
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case eburger
• 2009/04/01 [Sip] Proposal of Non-Sequential Group Notion in ABNF w/ a SIP case Munjo Yu
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dwight, Timothy M (Tim)
• 2009/04/01 Re: [P2PSIP] Solution space for fragmentation, congestion control and reliability Eric Rescorla
• 2009/04/01 Re: [P2PSIP] Solution space for fragmentation, congestion control and reliability Salman Abdul Baset
• 2009/04/01 Re: [P2PSIP] Solution space for fragmentation, congestion control and reliability Salman Abdul Baset
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Christer Holmberg
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/04/01 Re: [P2PSIP] Solution space for fragmentation, congestion control and reliability Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Christer Holmberg
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dwight, Timothy M (Tim)
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] comments on draft-barnes-sip-rfc4244bis-00.txt Mary Barnes
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hans Erik van Elburg
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dwight, Timothy M (Tim)
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] Media vs Signaling identity (was Re: francois' comments andwhy RFC4474 not used in the field) Victor Pascual Ávila
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] Media vs Signaling identity (was Re: francois' comments andwhy RFC4474 not used in the field) Elwell, John
• 2009/04/01 [Sip] Draft new version: draft-ietf-sip-199-07 Christer Holmberg
• 2009/04/01 [Sip] I-D Action:draft-ietf-sip-199-07.txt Internet-Drafts
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/04/01 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/31 [Sip] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-13 Thomson, Martin
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Cullen Jennings
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] Media vs Signaling identity (was Re: francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field) Jonathan Rosenberg
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] secure-call-id vs. session-id L.Liess
• 2009/03/31 [Sip] secure-call-id vs. session-id Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Christer Holmberg
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/31 [Sip] Media vs Signaling identity (was Re: francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field) Victor Pascual Ávila
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/03/31 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hans Erik van Elburg
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Anthony D Pike
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jonathan Rosenberg
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jonathan Rosenberg
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Elwell, John
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Michael Procter
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Uzelac, Adam
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Anthony D Pike
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 Victor Pascual Ávila
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Francois Audet
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/03/30 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Christer Holmberg
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dean Willis
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Dean Willis
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Dean Willis
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 Theo Zourzouvillys
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] draft-kaplan-sip-session-id-02 Theo Zourzouvillys
• 2009/03/29 Re: [Sip] B2BUA's changing call-id's: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Theo Zourzouvillys
• 2009/03/28 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Dan Wing
• 2009/03/28 Re: [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Francois Audet
• 2009/03/28 Re: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/28 [Sip] francois' comments and why RFC4474 not used in the field Jiri Kuthan
• 2009/03/28 Re: [Sip] [Geopriv] Geo URI and privacy URI DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
• 2009/03/28 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
• 2009/03/27 [Sip] B2BUA's changing call-id's: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Hadriel Kaplan
• 2009/03/27 [Sip] Completion of draft-ietf-sip-ua-privacy-06 DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] I-D Inaction: draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00.txt Adam Roach
• 2009/03/27 Re: [P2PSIP] Comments on draft-ietf-p2psip-diagnostics songhaibin 64081
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep L.Liess
• 2009/03/27 Re: [P2PSIP] Access control lists for RELOAD storage songhaibin 64081
• 2009/03/27 Re: [P2PSIP] Access control lists for RELOAD storage Narayanan, Vidya
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 L.Liess
• 2009/03/27 Re: [P2PSIP] Separation of identity assignment and service provider roles (RE: Configuration Updates in RELOAD) Narayanan, Vidya
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Salvatore Loreto
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Francois Audet
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep steve.norreys
• 2009/03/27 Re: [P2PSIP] Solution space for fragmentation, congestion control and reliability Salman Abdul Baset
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO) Hans Erik van Elburg
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO) Paul Kyzivat
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep marianne.mohali
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Doken, Serhad
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO) Doken, Serhad
• 2009/03/27 Re: [Sip] Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO) Doken, Serhad
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Shida Schubert
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep R.Jesske
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Bharrat, Shaun
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Uzelac, Adam
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Bob Penfield
• 2009/03/26 [P2PSIP] Access control lists for RELOAD storage Narayanan, Vidya
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Hans Erik van Elburg
• 2009/03/26 Re: [Sip] New version of draft-holmberg-sip-keep Theo Zourzouvillys

• Earlier messages
• Later messages