> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jiri Kuthan > Sent: 20 November 2008 17:58 > To: Raphael Coeffic > Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Sip] Review of draft-kuthan-sip-derive-00 > > Raphael Coeffic wrote: > > > I believe that the counter measure that you are proposing > has already > > been adressed in the draft. Concerning call forwarding, we > know that > > this is an issue. > > There are two such. The caller may have call forwarding setup > --> DERIVE > test will fail. [JRE] Why will it fail? Call forwarding applies to the handling of INVITE requests. SUBSCRIBE requests are not necessarily handled the same, although I imagine that many implementations may do so, and therefore your deduction is probably correct in many cases, but not necessarily all cases.
John >There is not much we can do about that. The > other is callee > may have call forwarding setup and may wonder if To in INVITE > can be used > for DERIVE test even though he is not registered under it. If > he is consent > with using it (which he should be able to), the caller will receive > a legitimate DERIVE test. So what I really think may fail here is > inconsistent > rewriting From/to by middleboxes. > > -jiri > _______________________________________________ > 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
