On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:22 AM, Hadriel Kaplan <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Hadriel, > So if the protection mechanism involved requires a change on the proxy and a > change on the UA's, to do the via-cookie mechanism, then why do the change so > high in the SIP stack? only for adoption reasons: First, It seemed to big a change to push and in reality get adopted in the "short" term by people as any other lower change requires more than just a few lines of code for people that want to implement it without caring about performance (for example, a SIP phone or something else that is not worried about high performance). DCCP offers the same features at a level already implemented by most major operating systems, as does DTLS - so we could use either of those and the problem goes away, too with potentially less complexity for implementers (at least in the DCCP case). Second, there are already a scary number of ALGs on DSL/cable routers and deployed out there - any non 3261 compliant method would likely require many of those be updated as well, although with all the SIP diagnostic tools like ethereal/wireshark and monitoring etc. ~ Theo _______________________________________________ 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
