[Dundi] [RFC] Reliability of contact information

[Kevin P. Fleming]

Florian Overkamp wrote:

> Err, the GPA is executed between organisations/persons, not between
> machines. If you control both the evilbox and the notsoevilbox, both fall
> under your GPA. I don't quite grasp what you mean with your last sentence
> though. 

Right, but if you only "peered" (shared keys and configuration 
information) notsoevilbox with your GPA counterpart, then evilbox is a 
"secondary" node within your network. My point is that it's possible to 
interpret the GPA language in such a way that since evilbox is not 
_registered_ with any GPA peers outside of your organization, it's not 
allowed to directly place calls using GPA-controlled contexts (it would 
have to place its calls through notsoevilbox, which is "registered"). 
This may be completely bogus; I'm just suggesting that it's one possible 
interpretation, and it may be a useful interpretation if we want to 
actually be able to trace/track calls back to their originators.