[SR-Users] [OT] IETF SIMPLE WG will destroy MSRP with the new draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch-11

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

for me it is so clear that the newer version is far more better than the 
old one since it will have a greater rfc number. Obvious! I cannot argue 
against it.

Cheers,
Daniel

PS. Guys, before implementing SIP-related RFC N, where N is greater than 
4000, wait until RFC N+3000 is published to see if there will be one 
obsoleting it. If not, you may be safe investing time in it.

On 5/25/11 1:00 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi, for those interested in MSRP protocol (instant message sessions
> and file transfer for SIP) there are bad news:
>
> Even if there are already clients and servers (MSRP relays o IM
> conference servers) implementing the MSRP protocol (RFC 4975 and 4976)
> the SIMPLE WG will publish a new draft [*] that breaks these RFC's
> just to satisfy big vendors interested in deploying MSRP capable
> SBC/ALG boxes (so instead of solving NAT issues with MSRP relays as
> RFC 4976 states, they want it to be fixed in the router by doing ugly
> ALG, or in a SBC). This is terrible because all the MSRP devices
> should implement this new draft in order to interoperate (no backward
> compatibility at all). The draft also breaks the security defined in
> RFC 4975 (for example, TLS name based authentication cannot work
> anymore).
>
> For further information I recommend reading these two posts:
>
>    http://blog.tekelec.com/blog/bid/29816/More-on-MSRP-Session-Match-Extension
>    http://blog.tekelec.com/blog/bid/33138/MSRP-Session-Match-Backwards-Compatibility
>
> and also these very *hot* mail threads in the SIMPLE maillist:
>
>    http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/simple/current/msg09227.html
>    http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/simple/current/msg09229.html
>
>
>
> [*] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch-11
>

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- http://www.asipto.com
http://linkedin.com/in/miconda -- http://twitter.com/miconda