1. Flemming Andreasen (fandreas@cisco.com)
SIP Extensions for Caller Identity and Privacy <draft-ietf-sip-privacy-03.txt>
Flemming Andreasen
W. Marshall, K. K. Ramakrishnan, E. Miller, G. Russell, B. Beser, M. Mannette, K. Steinbrenner, D. Oran, F. Andreasen, J. Pickens, P. Lalwaney, J. Fellows, D. Evans, K. Kelly, M. Watson
IETF - December 2001

2. I-D Evolution Privacy-01 draft presented at 50th IETF (Minn.)
Privacy-02 draft issued in May and thought to be ready for WG Last Call
However several concerns raised off-line
Scope and Proxy-Require in particular
Subsequent discussions resulted in refining the scope for the privacy draft:
Only address network authenticated Remote-Party-ID.
Remote-Party-ID is inserted by trusted entity
Assume trusted entity has somehow determined the relevant identity information.
Another draft will deal with the authentication problem

3. Overview of Changes Implications: Other changes:
Untrusted UA does not include Remote-Party-ID header
Trusted Entity (UA or proxy) inserts it
New RPID-Privacy header for UA to control privacy of Remote-Party-ID header inserted by trusted entity.
“Anonymous” From header field defaults to full privacy as well
Removed “alias” and “return” rpi-id-type from Remote-Party-ID
To avoid Proxy-Require: option to encrypt Remote-Party-ID headers within trust boundary (but other issues here)
Other changes:
Remote-Party-ID and Anonymity now allowed in other messages than INVITE and INVITE-responses.
INVITE, OPTIONS, extension methods, (REGISTER)

4. Overview of Changes, cont
Other changes, cont.
Parts of draft rewritten to better explain trusted versus untrusted entity behavior (proxy and UA).
Nature Of Party (Appendix A) updated per list discussion
Added “not-applicable”, “cellular-ordinary”, and “cellular-roaming” and mapping from information digits (II).
Next Steps
Please review and comment
WG Last Call