[Serdev] Re: [Serusers] how to increment cseq? (for uac auth)

[Samuel Osorio Calvo]

Just my 2 cents....

Since SER is transaction aware and not dialog aware, it is not easy to maintain consistent Cseq values during a dialog. I'm sure UAC maintainers are thinking on it and they will come with a solution, but just let them work without stress ;)

However, don't think the UAC approach is the right one having TLS around......I would prefer pushing for TLS instead of adding a table of existing dialog in SER with the appropriate values. I'm sure there's lots of providers reading this list so if everybody starts asking for TLS....well, big providers will start providing it for auth. I'm not an expert but I've been told implementing TLS is not a hard job....;)


Samuel.


Unclassified.
>>> "Greger V. Teigre" <greger at teigre.com> 06/09/05 07:18AM >>>

Michael Ulitskiy wrote:
> Greg, do you really believe that avoiding added, but optional
> complexity
> is good enough reason for not having IMHO necessary functionality?

Not at all. My point was that it is extremely important to add functionality 
where it belongs logically and where you can ensure that regular ser.cfg 
users are able to use the functionality without understanding the specs.

> Again, IMHO, having something better than ip auth is a must in
> today's internet.

Again, I agree.

> On the subject:
> I guess the reason is, as I said before, that not only cseq in
> original invite must be incremented, but cseq in all subsequent
> in-dialog messages must
> be adjusted (decremented for messages relayed to callee and
> incremented
> for messages relayed to called party). That is what, I guess, is hard
> to do in today's ser.
> I've posted my thoughts on how it possibly could be accomplished
> at http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serdev/2005-May/004589.html and
> haven't received any feedback or comments.
> I guess either there's a lack of interest for getting it to work
> which I guess is really strange or it's too hard to implement at
> current stage.
> As always any comments are welcome :)

I don't think it's a lack of interest or lack of need for it. All the 
developers are bombarded with requests and have long lists of core things to 
do.  Sometimes its even hard to get them to evaluate and include patches in 
CVS.
    IMHO, increment cseq belongs in the UAC module (can do far too much harm 
if users play around with it).  If you cannot get the maintainers attention, 
there is only one way: Get your hands dirty ;-)

g-) 

_______________________________________________
Serdev mailing list
serdev at lists.iptel.org 
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev