GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MFA for Business Banking – Security Code Multifactor Authentication: Quick Tip Sheets Note to Financial Institutions: We are providing these QT sheets.
Advertisements

MARTINI WG Interim draft-kaplan-martini-with-olive-00 Hadriel Kaplan.
SIP and Instant Messaging. SIP Summit SIP and Instant Messaging What Does Presence Have to Do With SIP? How to Deliver.
XCAP Tutorial Jonathan Rosenberg.
SIP Working Group Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Session-Independent Policies draft-ietf-sipping-session-indep-policy-01 Volker Hilt Gonzalo Camarillo
1 5 th SDO Emergency Services Workshop October 2008 “sos” URI parameter for marking emergency requests Milan Patel 5 th SDO Emergency Services Workshop.
SIP and IMS Enabled Residential Gateway Sergio Romero Telefónica I+D Jan Önnegren Ericsson AB Alex De Smedt Thomson Telecom.
ICE Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Changes Removed abstract protocol concept Relaxed requirements for ICE on servers and gateways – no address gathering.
Web Security A how to guide on Keeping your Website Safe. By: Robert Black.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. sip and sips General problem –What should gruu say about relationship of sips to gruu? Specific questions –If the.
GRUU Mechanism Jonathan Rosenberg. Status Draft-rosenberg-sipping-gruu-reqs-01 defines the problem Draft-rosenberg-sip-gruu submitted with proposed solution.
What is a SIP Trunk Anyway?!? Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco.
Individual User Logins
1 SIP WG meeting 73rd IETF - Minneapolis, MN, USA November, 2008 Return Routability Check draft-kuthan-sip-derive-00 Jiri
Request History – Solution Mary Barnes SIP WG Meeting IETF-57 draft-ietf-sip-history-info-00.txt.
NAT Traversal Speaker: Chin-Chang Chang Date:
1 © NOKIA 1999 FILENAMs.PPT/ DATE / NN SIP Service Architecture Markus Isomäki Nokia Research Center.
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). What is SIP? An application-layer protocol A control (signaling) protocol.
Draft-rosen-ecrit-emergency- framework-00 Brian Rosen NeuStar CPa
XCAP Needed Diffs Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems.
July 16, Diameter EAP Application (draft-ietf-aaa-eap-02.txt) on behalf of...
Author(s) Politehnica University of Bucharest Automatic Control and Computers Faculty Computer Science Department Implementation of GRUU in SIP Vladut-Stefan.
CP-a Emergency call stage 2 requirements - A presentation of the requirements from 3GPP TS Keith Drage.
SIPPING IETF 57 Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
November 2005IETF64 - ECRIT1 Emergency Service Identifiers draft-ietf-sipping-sos-01 draft-schulzrinne-sipping-service-01 Henning Schulzrinne Columbia.
7/6/20061 Speermint Use Case for Cable IETF 66 Yiu L. Lee JULY 2006.
1 SPEERMINT Use Cases for Cable IETF 66 Montreal 11 JULY 2006 Presented by Yiu L. Lee.
SIP working group IETF#70 Essential corrections Keith Drage.
Patrik Fältström. ITU Tutorial Workshop on ENUM. Feb 8, 2002, Geneva Explanation of ENUM (RFC 2916) Patrik Fältström Area Director, Applications Area,
The User Registered UA URL draft-xu-sipping-uruu-01.txt Peili Xu
Congestion Safety Changes and Issues draft-ietf-sip-congestsafe-01.
Issues and Status in App Interaction Team Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Caller Prefs and Friends Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Making SIP NAT Friendly Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
SIP Extensions for Network-Asserted Caller Identity and Privacy within Trusted Networks Flemming Andreasen W. Marshall, K. K. Ramakrishnan,
ECRIT - Getting Certain URIs, and Alternatives to Getting Emergency Dialstring(s) draft-polk-ecrit-lost-server-uri-00 draft-polk-dhc-ecrit-uri-psap-esrp-00.
Secure Operating Systems Lesson F: Capability Based Systems.
- 1 -P. Kyzivatdraft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 Reg Event Package Extensions draft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 IETF64 Nov-2005.
RFC3261 (Almost) Robert Sparks. SIPiT 10 2 Status of the New SIP RFC Passed IETF Last Call In the RFC Editor queue Author’s 48 hours review imminent IMPORTANT:
Presence Authorization Rules Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems.
1 RFC4028 Session Timer in the Session Initiation Protocol Speaker : Ying Shun Lin Adviser : Quincy Wu.
Currently Open Issues in the MIPv6 Base RFC MIPv6 security design team.
March 20, 2007BLISS BOF IETF-681 Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Changes in -06 Editorial as a result of RFC-ED early copy experiment.
Call Completion using BFCP draft-roach-sipping-callcomp-bfcp IETF 67 – San Diego November 7, 2006.
1 IETF 72 BLISS WG meeting draft-ietf-bliss-ach-analysis-02 John Elwell.
Caller Preferences Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
March 20th, 2001 SIP WG meeting 50th IETF SIP WG meeting Overlap signalling handling
SIPPING Drafts Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft. Conferencing Package Issues Only one – scope Depends on broader work in conferencing May include –Participant.
SIP Working Group IETF 72 chaired by Keith Drage, Dean Willis.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Main Changes Up front discussion of URI properties Opaque URI parameter for constructing GRUU Procedure for EP.
Globally Identifiable Number (GIN) Registration Adam Roach draft-martini-roach-gin-01 IETF 77 – Anaheim, CA, USA March 22, 2010.
SIP wg Items Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft Caller Preferences: Changes Discussion of Redirects –Previous draft only proxy –Nothing different for redirect.
SIP connection tracking
sip-identity-04 Added new response codes for various conditions
Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft
ECRIT Interim: SIP Location Conveyance
draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-00 Ben Campbell
Hitchhikers Guide to SIP
EA C451 Vishal Gupta.
Request-URI Param Delivery
Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) draft-johnston-bliss-mla-req-00.
Verstat Related Best Practices
Flemming Andreasen SIP Extensions for Caller Identity and Privacy Flemming Andreasen
Change Proposals for SHAKEN Documents
LiveWire Log in page TIPS
SIP Session Timer Glare Handling
Presentation transcript:

GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems

Top 10 Reasons why GRUU is like a Whale 1.Its big and heavy 2.It seems like its been around for a long time 3.It looks friendly but can swallow you whole 4.Kind of cute, but not really 5.Misunderstood 6.Lives a really long time 7.Continues to consume resources to support its huge size 8.Blows hot air every once in a while 9.Rumored to be intelligent but cannot be confirmed 10.Can get beached, during which it moves very little

What Happened? Review Team was assembled Many significant comments were raised Result was a substantial change in GRUU functionality and a sizeable rewrite of the document Specification got shorter (removed 5 pages) and hopefully clearer

High Level Changes Temporary GRUU Parameter Renaming GRID removal SIPS removal

Temporary GRUU Motivations GRUU didn’t address privacy, and made RFC 3261 privacy even worse when used Requirements for privacy in Europe in particular would make GRUU unusable without more features Desire was to add just enough privacy to meet “RFC3261 equivalence”

Temporary GRUU Temporary and “Public” GRUU both returned in REGISTER response Each refresh provides a new temporary GRUU All accumulated temporary GRUU remain valid till registration ends Temporary GRUU are uncorrelateable to each other and AOR or instance ID UA REG Power on REG Temp1,pub REG Temp2,pub Temp3,pub Valid Temp1, pub Temp1, Temp2, pub Temp1, Temp2, Temp3. pub Expires! pub

Notes on Temporary GRUU UA can remember zero, one or more temporary GRUU UA can use a different temporary GRUU in each call or the same one There is no forced invalidation mechanism –UA can reject incoming requests if it wants –UA can use other mechanism (consent framework) to ask network to block

Parameter Renaming Old NameNew Name “gruu” URI param“gr” “gruu” Contact param“pub-gruu” and “temp- gruu” “gruu” option tag“gruu”

GRID Removal EKR observation that the general problem and mechanism was equally applicable to AOR –Insert a cookie into an AOR or GRUU, get it back when its de-referenced Viewed as a secondary requirement for GRUU –Endpoint conference was one motivator – can actually use temporary GRUU now for that Proposal for mechanism in UA loose route (later)

SIPS Removal Whatever we have in here would be –Wrong in the worst case –Vague in the best case, in order to not conflict with sips guidelines

Other Changes Removed URI properties discussion New introduction by EKR Removed UML model Added “self-made” GRUU Originating proxy verifies GRUU in INVITE vs. identity of requestor Record-Routing requirements relaxed in home proxies –Originating:If the request has a GRUU in Contact and Record-Routes –Terminating: If request is to a contact that has a GRUU, and there is a Path Added tel URI handling rules

Other Changes Removed normative requirements on having different contact for each AOR Registrar rejects registration if contact equals AOR (i.e., its my GRUU) Added network design considerations for using GRUU

Open Issues Objection to the anonymous mechanism –No URI invalidation –Default lifetime too long – should expire like normal –Temporary is a bad name –No need to get both – should be able to ask for one or the other Objection to removal of GRID GRUU and AOR equivalence is broken