--
Agenda:
--
Review / Modify Agenda
Accept Minutes of 4/28/03 Meeting
Review Current Action Item List
H.350 Sent to SIPPING
Report On Status of Getting commObject Directory Testbed Going
Update on Availability of UNC / NWU Code
Report from IMTC/Wainhouse Spring Forum
--
Attendees:
--
Jason Lynn - U.A.B.
Aditya Srinivasan - U.A.B.
Egon Verharen - SURFnet
Tyler Johnson - U.N.C.
Samir Chatterjee - C.G.U.
Tarun Abhichandani - C.G.U.
Bengisu Tulu - C.G.U.
Haiqing Li - C.G.U.
--
Action Items:
--
* Samir - Find out if Dynamicsoft can handle certificates.
* Aditya - Post PKI information to the list.
--
Meeting:
--
Tyler mentioned that Samir posted to the list that User Agent vendors
will not implement this architecture for SIP User Agents. Tyler said
that there is a similar problem in the H.323 world; there is no need to
implement this architecture if you are using the DNS SRV approach.
Samir said that Dynamicsoft has given them the new proxy which includes
the new SIP stack (which uses DNS SRV) but the API has changed
considerably. He said that it would take considerable effort (three
months) to change over to the new proxy.
When the group was on the subject of dumping this architecture for other
methods, Aditya said that the RFC states that manual configuration of
the endpoint is the last choice, or failsafe, for configuring the
endpoint. Tyler said that he doesn't believe that the RFC says this.
Tyler went on to say that perhaps this architecture isn't a fit for
SIP. He said that maybe if you were dealing with S-MIME, LDAP would be
a good fit. He said that the main thing is to have the call server
commObject-enabled; endpoint configuration is just a nice side effect.
He said that there is no need to go to this trouble; certificate storage
is much more interesting.
Tyler said that the private key could be stored in LDAP as well as the
public key. Most agreed that this would be a bad idea. Aditya said
that the attributes in LDAP that deal with PKI are certificates, which
only store public keys. Private key storage is atypical. This would be
a concern to many people. Samir said that storing both keys would never
work. Having both keys in LDAP, the system administrator could easily
mimic you. He went on to say that C.G.U. would go on to do more
research and see if Dynamicsoft can handle certificates. He also noted
that to upgrade to the new stack, C.G.U. would be unable to make the
June deadline. Tyler asked Aditya that if he had any PKI information
that would be useful, he should post it to the list. Aditya said he
would post some links to the list.
Egon wanted to add to the agenda his report on the IMTC/Wainhouse Spring
Forum that he recently attended in Geneva. The videoconferencing world
is not doing well. The entire industry is looking for customers. Most
are looking ahead and developing new technology instead of focusing on
the current problem; lack of customers. There were no SIP-only
presentations, only H.323-only presentations. SIP was not well
represented. The mood was very negative and tense. One good thing that
happened was that Egon met the new voice boss at Cisco. He also met
other good contacts at Cisco. This group is recognized as a big
videoconferencing network and they would like to get together and talk
with us about a numbering plan. Egon didn't see any Annex E or F
development; only Annex D. To conclude, Egon said that SIP and presence
information is the place to be right now.
Tyler said that he has been rethinking things and that he believes that
we can have GDS support for SIP. The group needs to discuss this at
some point.
Next, the discussion turned toward the review of action items. There
was only one item on the list; is H323URL case sensitive or
insensitive. Tyler said that he has found the information and
incorporated it into the new documents. He said that it is partially
sensitive. The user part is sensitive. There can also be embedded URLs
in the H323URL so H323URL must be case sensitive.
Tyler said that Jill sent the documents to SIPPING group and the only
comment so far was, "Thanks".
Tyler said that he has received the Perl code from Larry. He also said
that they will release their code this week before he and Nadim leave
for Geneva. The code that U.N.C. is releasing is based on NMI release
version 1 and an older version of commObject. If ratification occurs,
they will update the code to ratification material.
Tyler also mentioned that they may remove the Gatekeeper reference from
ViDe so that a zone would just become a collection of endpoints.
Egon mentioned that Peter, the developer of the webcrawler, is working
and thinking about the level of redirection problem that we have with
this architecture. He also said that the code will probably be released
royalty free and probably open source.
Tyler said that, for now, the meeting on the 26th (a holiday) will
continue as planned.
Bengisu brought to the groups attention that the SIP username is derived
from the first part of the SIPURI (before the @ symbol). Tyler said,
"So we don't need a username for SIP". Bengisu said that is what she
was trying to say. There was some discussion about the authentication
and registration portions of SIP. Tyler asked if he could authenticate
as Tyler and register as Egon. Bengisu said that registration and
authentication are not really separate steps. Tyler said that perhaps
this should be added to the agenda for next meeting.