> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Elwell, John > > 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 haven't thought about this since it was last on the list, and I think I was a proponent of it at that time, but why were we thinking this would ever be set? I mean if I'm a clid spoofer, why would I ever want to add such a param?? Isn't it like a "spam=yes" flag you're describing, and then expecting potential spammers to set it? I've forgotten the train of thought which lead to this param as a viable solution. > 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. Or just source=evil. ;) -hadriel _______________________________________________ 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
