10 Aug
2006
10 Aug
'06
12:23 a.m.
Jiri Kuthan wrote:
At 22:34 08/08/2006, Steve Blair wrote:
Please clarify. "...downloading the corresponding number...". From where
to where? Do you mean extracting the user portion of the From header URI
from the usr_preference table?
-Steve
Evan Borgström wrote:
RPID is being used in many existing deploments. There is now the Identity header field
which made it to RFC and does pretty much the same thing.
In the upcoming SER release, we solve it by downloading the corresponding number
from user profile, and leaving it to script to "wrap" the originator's phone
number
by properly formatted header field.
Changing the From header is not really a
good thing to do, instead you
should look at implementing the Remote-Party-ID (RPID) headers using the
append_rpid_hf() function and if privacy is requested the privacy=full
tag should be applied. The auth modules can retrieve the RPID value from
a database or radius engine.
I agree although an exception is allowed for "anonymous" users. This is
what we currently use for caller ID blocking. My current replace function call replaces
the entire from address (display name and URI) with the anonymous string recommended in
RFC3323.
Any modern device (UAC, UAS, Gateway, etc)
should support the RPID
header and should honor the privacy tag.
I was just told by a consultant that RPID has been deprecated by the IETF. I do not
have any more information on this move but if true it suggests that this is the wrong
approach. Does anyone have any more information about this? Does anyone have any
additional suggestions?
-jiri
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/