[SIPForum-techwg] STUN usage in PBX SP interface draft

[Joanne McMillen]

I agree 100% - can't go there unless it's RFC.
But... that kinda brings up a question I have been wondering about anyway.
Where exactly are we with the interface spec?

I would think issues like this would now be focused on an updated version, but I'm unclear
where we are on the original version. Can someone clarify for me please?
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Francois Audet 
  To: Sharon Laivand ; techwg at sipforum.org 
  Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 10:05 AM
  Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] STUN usage in PBX SP interface draft


  We can't really point to "drafts", especially these ones which changes drastically every 4 months.

  We'll have to either use RFC 3489, or if 3489bis becomes an RFC soon, that 3489bis RFC.

  Same thing applies to ICE: we can't refer to it until it becomes an RFC.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:techwg-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Sharon Laivand
    Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 7:21 AM
    To: techwg at sipforum.org
    Subject: [SIPForum-techwg] STUN usage in PBX SP interface draft


    Hello all,

     

    As you all probably know, STUN standardization moves towards RFC-3489-bis-04. The latest STUN draft is not backwards compatible with RFC 3489.

    The new STUN draft is fitted to co-operate with ICE functionality. Therefore we can assume that at that point or another, the bis-04 drat will replace the 3489 one.

     

     

    Why don't we put the RFC-3489-bis-04 as the "MUST" one (or at least optional) in the PBX-SP interface draft?

     

     

    Thanks.

     

    Sharon Laivand

    RADVISION,  TBU

    www.radvision.com

     



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  techwg mailing list
  Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org
  Unsubscribe or edit options at:  http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://sipforum.org/pipermail/techwg/attachments/20060801/140798a0/attachment-0001.html