> -Allow SRTP, but don't protect the certificate fingerprint > That's what I would do.
Ciao Hannes > Kai > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig >> Sent: Freitag, 4. April 2008 10:51 >> To: Elwell, John >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Sip] RFC 4474 and PSTN >> >> I would instead not put the SIP Identity header there. >> No additional work needed. >> >> Ciao >> Hannes >> >> Elwell, John wrote: >> >>> There seems to be some interest in adding some indicator to >>> >> the URI or >> >>> to the header field to warn of the limited guarantee of >>> >> authenticity or >> >>> the opposite (i.e.,lack of such an indicator would mean the >>> >> guarantee is >> >>> low, i.e., the identity has not been verified). >>> >>> I think on this issue it is just a matter of somebody putting things >>> together into a draft. I think Dean and/or Adam were the >>> >> main initiators >> >>> of this proposal - something like a source=pstn parameter. Would >>> somebody care to author a draft? Or do we need further discussion? >>> >>> John >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip >>> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol >>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip >>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip >> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol >> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip >> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip >> >> _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
