[H.323-SIP/Internet] Re: H323/SIP Interworking - way forward
Hello guys! I have exactly same point of view on this path. I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same path. In my understanding (1) and (3) are the same combined (GK and SIP Server) entity (2) is a GK++ being able to talk to SIP Server using SIP only(?) (4) is a SIP Server++ being able to talk to GK using RAS (?) using Annex G/H.225.0 (?) Based on this I would vote for (1) and (3) only (which are the same).
"Now, to thin it some more..." Considerations in regards to GK Routed/Direct modes and SIP Proxy flavors ... I vote for - GK Routed mode only - SIP Server having a logic of Statefull Proxy, Registrar and Redirect Server Regards, Orit Levin RADVision Inc. 575 Corporate Drive Suite 420 Mahwah, NJ 07430 Tel: 1 201 529 4300 (230) Fax: 1 201 529 3516 www.radvision.com orit@radvision.com -----Original Message----- From: Paul E. Jones paul.jones@ties.itu.int To: sip-h323@egroups.com sip-h323@egroups.com Date: Thursday, March 02, 2000 2:44 AM Subject: [sip-h323] Re: H323/SIP Interworking - way forward
David,
Dave Walker suggested removing the first 5 scenarios. I'd agree with that recommendation.
Now, to thin it some more...
Would it not be a reasonable thing to state that interworking between H.323 networks/devices and SIP networks/devices should be performed by either a
GK
or proxy that contains the interworking functions. If folks agree with that, then we could just have these scenarios:
HT-----GK/IWF---------------------------ST HT-----GK/IWF--------------------SR-----ST HT-----------------------------SR/IWF---ST HT-----GK----------------------SR/IWF---ST
Of course, the first two and the last two above are virtually identical.
If
the IWF is designed appropriately, there should be no need to make a
special
case for #2 and #4 above.
The reason I would propose this is that it makes sense to collocate the interworking function within such a device. Additionally, it removes
burden
(both new signaling procedures and complexity) from the endpoints, which I think should be a goal.
Paul
----- Original Message ----- From: "Wang, Dave" dwang@nuera.com To: sip-h323@egroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 9:53 AM Subject: [sip-h323] Re: H323/SIP Interworking - way forward
I 2nd Christian's 4 things and their ordering.
We have started working on the 1st 3 things in IMTC aHIT and ETSI TIPHON, but would definitely use more input.
Therefore, could we start having some suggestion and discussion here on
the
1st thing : "Architecture and Call Scenarios" ?
There was a very short discussion in this thread about "combination" in January started by Joon Maeng, and Kundan Singh. Here is a set of combinations that I've expanded from that discussion. I don't mean to
make
the scenarios more comprehensive and complicated. I'm just trying to show the various combinations and ask whether we can explicity decided to
ignore
some of them :
HT-------(H.323)----------------------------------HT
ST------------------------------------(SIP)-------ST
HT---GK--(H.323)----------------------------------HT
ST------------------------------------(SIP)--SR---ST
HT-------(H.323)--IWF-----------------(SIP)-------HT
HT-------(H.323)--IWF-----------------(SIP)-------ST
HT---GK--(H.323)--IWF-----------------(SIP)-------ST
HT---GK--(H.323)--IWF-----------------(SIP)--SR---ST
HT-------(H.323)--IWF-----------------(SIP)--SR---ST
HT-------(H.323)--IWF---(SIP)---IWF--(H.323)------HT
ST--------(SIP)---IWF--(H.323)--IWF---(SIP)-------ST
HT == H.323 Terminal ST == SIP Terminal GK == H.323 Gate Keeper SR == SIP Server IWF == SIP/H.323 Inter-working Function
Its has already been pointed out that we should also include Clearing
House
in the scenarios, however, may be we should have some more discussion and possibly some thinning down before thickening it up yet.
-----Original Message----- From: Christian Groves [mailto:Christian.Groves@ericsson.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 2:43 AM To: SG16; sip-h323 Subject: [sip-h323] H323/SIP Interworking - way forward
G'Day all,
The [H.323-SIP/Internet] thread has lead to some interesting discussion. Being personally involved in the H248 "success" and having actually having had to fight through the process of having to work between SG16 and IETF I think there's a few steps that need to be taken before we go into mapping information elements.
I believe the first thing we need to do is define what architecture and call scenarios we are working with. H323 has several architectural elements, SIP is not so strong on architecture so we need to show what elements are talking to each other. Only then we can define what interfaces need to be interworked. In H248 this was relatively easy as the interface was between an MGC and MG. The H323-SIP interworking would be another degree of difficulty as there are potentially several interfaces. This architecture work would not slow down the work but would lead to a structured way of working were people agree on a problem space. One of the issues with H248 was that the problem space was not agree on and we went back and forth trying to figure out where we were.
As I mentioned at the SG16 I invite people to make contributions on this. Anything more detailed at this stage I believe is counter productive. Even Orit's first proposal I think is too detailed at this stage. Look at the early H248 work where we had many detailed protocols. There was an inordinate amount of work spent (and many late nights) trying to get from details to architecture. Then we had to go back again and define the protocol.
The 2nd thing to do is to define the set of capabilities we intend to interwork. This needs to be a clear statement of scope. Interworking basic audio with no conferencing and services is significantly different than interworking full audio, video and data conferencing. In H248 the scope was so large that people were working on completely different things without appreciating the other people's requirements.
Thirdly, we must choose our base. What H323version will be interwork with what SIP flavour and functionalities? Of course in today's world there needs to be flexibility to address new functionality but we shouldn't add a new work item every time of version 0 of an internet draft from Joe Bloggs comes out.
Fourthly, I believe that once the above is done, then we have a very good idea of what functional interworking work needs to be done. Once we have an idea of the work we can also figure out where the responsibilities would lie.
Once we know the work and who is responsible for the work then we MUST make sure this is agreed upon and documented in both the ITU and IETF by the people who can make decisions. Too many things were hidden in the H248 work and people that could make decisions were not at the appropriate meetings.
Finally we can then produce the detailed documents in a way that everyone understands.
I do think that at the end of the day H.248 was a success and that the co-operation between the IETF and ITU was made to work. This was because of the large amount of work and sacrifices made by a few individuals and companies who wanted to make this happen. Many of the individuals working on H248 will probably contribute on H323/SIP interworking so lets learn from the mistakes and have another go at making H323-SIP interworking work without having to kill ourselves to achieve the goal.
Cheers, Christian
To Post a message, send it to: sip-h323@eGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: sip-h323-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
Shabang!com is the place to get your FREE eStore, Absolutely FREE Forever. If you have any desires to sell your products or services online, or you want to expand your customer base for FREE, Come check out Shabang!com FREE eStores! http://click.egroups.com/1/1299/2/_/302437/_/951907402/
-- Easily schedule meetings and events using the group calendar! -- http://www.egroups.com/cal?listname=sip-h323&m=1
To Post a message, send it to: sip-h323@eGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: sip-h323-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 0.0% Intro APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/969/2/_/302437/_/951922564/
-- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault -- http://www.egroups.com/docvault/sip-h323/?m=1
To Post a message, send it to: sip-h323@eGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: sip-h323-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com: http://click.egroups.com/1/2130/2/_/302437/_/951983045/
-- Create a poll/survey for your group! -- http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=sip-h323&m=1
participants (1)
-
Orit Levin