|Summary:||ASTERISK-01114: IETF Draft: SIP Extensions for Caller Identity and Privacy.|
|Date Opened:||2004-02-27 07:41:44.000-0600||Date Closed:||2011-06-07 14:05:23|
|Description:||Asterisk (chan_sip) does not support the use of the Remote-Party-ID field to identify if the calling party number should be withheld from display or not as per IETF draft: draft-ietf-privacy-.02.txt, SIP Extensions for Caller Identity and Privacy.|
****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ******
The problem was discovered when using Cisco AS5300 with 12.3(4)T IOS receiving calls from the PSTN which are translation to SIP VoIP calls. The Cisco equipment populates the Remote-Party-ID field correctly but chan_sip does nothing with it.
|Comments:||By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-02-27 14:46:00.000-0600|
What does the RFC state? Or is it an RFC yet?
By: Rob Gagnon (rgagnon) 2004-02-27 16:27:30.000-0600
according to the draft, it expired on Nov 20, 2001.
It is moot, and not part of RFC3261
By: James Golovich (jamesgolovich) 2004-02-28 05:20:03.000-0600
Here is a cisco URL that contains a SIP trace of it
By: adamlow (adamlow) 2004-03-01 10:44:36.000-0600
The IETF draft (apparently expired draft) details the use of the Remote-Party-ID field to propogate information such as CLI presentation from ISDN originated calls into a VoIP network.
We require this has we have had a complaint that we are passing numbers from the ISDN network that would otherwise be hidden (presentation denied within ISDN) onto our SIP based clients.
Full packet dumps from our enviroment available on request.
By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-03-02 00:50:36.000-0600
If the RFC doesn't say how to do this and the draft has expired then what do we do?
By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-03-13 00:44:36.000-0600
Lets figure out what to do on this and we will reopen it.