26 Feb
2009
26 Feb
'09
5:20 p.m.
2009/2/26 Johansson Olle E <oej(a)edvina.net>et>:
" This document provides clarifications and
guidelines concerning the
use of the SIPS URI scheme in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).
It also makes normative changes to SIP."
"1. Introduction
The meaning and usage of the SIPS URI scheme and of TLS [RFC5246] is
underspecified in SIP [RFC3261] and has been a source of confusion for
implementers. This document provides clarifications and guidelines
concerning the use of the SIPS URI scheme in the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP). It also makes normative changes to SIP (including both
[RFC3261] and [RFC3608]."
This is very common in lots of RFC's: It seems that a draft must
contain some stuff about "security" and "privacy" in order to be
accepted as a new RFC.
For example, each new RFC has a vague section mentioning S/MIME:
"In order to provide security the UA could use S/MIME"
Of course, S/MIME is not implemented *AT ALL*, but that seems not to
be important, the target is publishing a new RFC so S/MIME, SIPS,
IPSEC and TLS stuff is required to appear "somewhere" in the draft.
IETF guys should visit our planet someday.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc(a)aliax.net>