[Freeswitch-users] TLS receiving calls

[Michael Collins]

Bring on SNAP, baby!

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Kristian Kielhofner <
kkielhofner at star2star.com> wrote:

> On 12/2/08, Anthony Minessale <anthony.minessale at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Naturally, either way is stupid.
>
>  Word.
>
> > The whole idea of putting the transport in a uri param is equally stupid
> to
> > using 2 different protocol names but since SIP is the descendant of http
> it
> > they decided to stick with the stupidity of http/https and have sip/sips
> > which is almost as if it was designed to break all software trying to
> keep
> > up with url syntax.
>
>  Too late now.
>
> > If they are going to insist on using text params you'd think something
> like
> > transport=foo;security=tls would be even *more* flexable in case
> alternate
> > methods to encrypt crop up.
>
>  I can agree with you here...
>
>  URI parameters in SIP have come to be the catch all for random junk
> that doesn't seem to fit anywhere else.  Note that "random junk"
> includes everything from transport, to number portability, to CICs, to
> ISUP-OLI and on.
>
>  Even in my world setting up proxies, UAs, etc to parse out the
> various crap people put in SIP URI params is a hassle.  A big one.
>
>  What a mess!!!
>
> > This is, of course, the first step into a lengthy 12 hour discussion on
> how
> > stupid SIP and url/text based
> >  protocols are.
>
>  I like them but I'm weird.
>
> > I dare someone to crank up the pcap on a box doing SIP presence for 20
> > phones and "read"
> > the 1200 byte messages with all kinds of hyeroglyphic url syntax and
> > embedded xml payloads and write
> >  up a paper on how much "sense" it makes to have it be "readable".
>
>  I do it all the time.  I think it's quite usable.  ngrep provides a
> small enough binary and the ability to match on text.  Certainly
> easier to use, especially on embedded systems without the luxury of
> dedicated protocol decoders.  With a simple ngrep binary I can debug
> any text based protocol I understand.
>
>  Of course, turn on TLS and see how useful *any* of these tools are...
>
>  The core SIP spec and authors can't be blamed for the various junk
> people have been putting in SIP bodies.  If what's going on in the
> real world is any indication, that ship sailed long ago.  At this
> point as long as implementations can at least handle multi-part
> sensibly and everyone specifies the correct MIME type I don't really
> care.
>
>  Even nastier examples abound - embedded, encapsulated ISUP!  How
> about GTD?  What about Linksys phones using SIP INFO to serve
> directories?  Man I could go on and on...
>
>  I'm not going to write a paper about it but I don't think it's that
> bad.  Maybe I'm not just weird; maybe I'm a masochist! :)
>
> > PS
> >
> > supposedly sofia can support sctp,
> > someone should try it.
>
>  That would be cool.  For anyone wanting to try, various SERs support
> SCTP.  Cisco gateways do too.
>
> --
> Kristian Kielhofner
> http://blog.krisk.org
> http://www.submityoursip.com
> http://www.astlinux.org
> http://www.star2star.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freeswitch-users mailing list
> Freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20081202/f9c86486/attachment-0002.html