60 likes | 115 Views
Connected Party ID (considered evil) Who I’m Talking To. Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com. Problem. Basic problem is when A is talking to B, letting know A know that B has changed to C Can happen before or after 200 Can happen from caller to callee or callee to caller. Approaches.
E N D
Connected Party ID(considered evil)Who I’m Talking To Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com
Problem • Basic problem is when A is talking to B, letting know A know that B has changed to C • Can happen before or after 200 • Can happen from caller to callee or callee to caller
Approaches • 1) Consider this a update of state in dialog • 1a) modify To/From (but tags stay same) • 1b) put identity in some other header • 2) Consider this a transfer to a new user
1a) Update To or From • Pro: • Easy to understand and implement • Does not end up with duplicate data in some other location • Would make To and From meaningful • Con: • Not compatible with 2543 • Could use supported tag • Harm when not understood is minimal • (Will get a 481) • Number of 2543 endpoints is dropping
1b) Update with new header • Could put identity in new header, body, AIB • (but not PAI) • Pro: • Backward compatible 2543 • same end result as 1a • Con: • Phones display one thing for identity. SIP has To/From, PAI, SMIME cert identity, identity identity, Contact, Headers in AIB, and now something else? • What does a UA developer display on phone?
2) Consider it a transfer • Pro: • We have it. • Consistent use of protocol for when B changed to C • Con: • Early attended transfer has issues • Transfer has some serious security issues if S/MIME & AIB is not used. May be disabled across trust domains.