> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So let me get this, um, straight: what people really want is to be able > to trust the callerid but that's precisely what we can't provide. Hmm. > And many of things that you point out about breakage with 4474 is > not _really_ a fault of 4474 per se, it's that you're hoping essentially > for the impossible: having a signature survive through a b2bua sausage > factory.
Right, nothing is really the fault of 4474 - just like nothing about S/MIME or AIB is really their fault either. Useful at all though, they are not. I don't disagree though that it's a sausage factory and it'll be a bit of rolling the dice to see if this thing works or has value. > Sounds all too familiar. I agree with the "blame me" stance, and I'm > not dissing the idea of 4474 being more flexible in what headers it > can sign. It's just that this is all very tangled with the possible, > the impossible and the unknown. Yup. It sucketh. > A short cut! Run away! :) When the hair is long and the temperature hot, a short-cut is sometimes what you really need. :) -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
