[SIPForum-discussion] Privacy header for Anonymous calls (Remote-Party-ID Header)

Wed May 28 15:47:31 UTC 2008

Hello Athar,

Thanks for the prompt and detailed reply. I am seeing two different
privacy headers when I hide the callerID. Our Softswitch always append
privacy=full for a callerID hide calls in Remote-Party-ID. 

Remote-Party-ID: "Test,Sip" <sip:
7026441230 at 66.164.79.65>;party=calling;id-type=subscriber;privacy=full

Whereas I noticed one of my SIP Peering partner append privacy=uri for a
callerID hide call. 

Remote-Party-ID: <sip: 7026668880 at 8.4.7.6:5060>;privacy=uri

Wondering to know is there any difference between privacy=full or
privacy=uri and why one Softswitch picks full as oppose to uri by other.
Are both meaning the same? 

Regards,

Rashid Shakil.

-----Original Message-----
From: Athar Waqas [mailto:athar.waqas at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:48 AM
To: Shakil, Rashid
Cc: discussion at sipforum.org; sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Privacy header for Anonymous calls
(Remote-Party-ID Header)

Hi Shakil
Well lets see ur asking whats the URI thing doing in the privacy
header... simple answer to this is when you have to hide the callerID
number and send your own number from the GW then the privacy header is
set to URI.
You do not necessarily include the From URL in the Remote-Party-ID. What
you include is identity information for the calling party which may or
may not be the same (if you want privacy, you obviously don't include
your real identity in the From header field, since the From header field
cannot be changed). You can put anyting you want in a From URL, but not
in a Remote-Party-Id.

In your case 

Remote-Party-ID: <sip:7026668880 at 8.4.7.6:5060
<http://sip:7026668880@8.4.7.6:5060/> >;privacy=uri

Anonymity: uri

in this scenario, the sip/isup gw will use one of its own phone numbers
as the calling party number and that number needs privacy, not the
original from uri:<sip:7026668880 at 8.4.7.6:5060
<http://sip:7026668880@8.4.7.6:5060/> >

You do not necessarily include the From URL in the Remote-Party-ID. What
you include is identity information for the calling party which may or
may not be the same (if you want privacy, you obviously don't include
your real identity in the From header field, since the From header field
cannot be changed). You can put anyting you want in a From URL, but not
in a Remote-Party-Id.

There is no such requirement. In fact, if you have requested privacy,
you are almost guaranteed that the two will be different.

I hope i have been as simple as i can be but if you need anyother
information please do get back.

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Shakil, Rashid <rshakil at covad.com>
wrote:

Hello,

Folks just have a quick question. If I am receiving a caller ID
hide/anonymous call what should be privacy header (part of
Remote-Party-ID header) look like in the SIP peering environment. Should
the privacy header is "privacy=full". One of my SIP Peer is sending
"privacy=uri" for anonymous calls/caller ID hide calls and my question
is it a correct format or do they have to send "privacy=full". I never
noticed "uri" so far all the previous carriers I have worked with send
"full" for caller ID hide calls and "off" for normal calls.

Remote-Party-ID: <sip:7026668880 at 8.4.7.6:5060>;privacy=uri

Anonymity: uri

Regards,

Rashid Shakil.

_______________________________________________
This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit
http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org

-- 
Athar Waqas
Manager NGN
Breezecom
Mobile: +92-321-3895127
Direct: +92-21-5823676
Landline: +92-21-5378226/7
Email: athar at breezecom.ae
MSN ID: athar at breezecom.ae
Fax: +92-21-5824178
Address: F-73/4, Block 4, Clifton, Karachi, Pakistan 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20080528/fb9219f5/attachment-0002.html>