[SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency

Thu Feb 12 18:02:12 EST 2009

Yes, of course I expect PBXes to do real-time text. It should be a natural
addition to any audio call. 
( Asterisk does if you take the right latest version )

We discussed a month ago or so if we could get the requirement into
SIPconnect, to handle the real-time text medium. But the result of that
discussion was that it was not the right time to include more features.

Therefore my hope stands to this statement about pasthrough of unknown media
lines and media.

( And Hadriel confirmed that it would work ).

Gunnar 
-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:fluffy at cisco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 10:19 PM
To: Gunnar Hellstrom
Cc: 'Bernard Aboba'; mdolly at att.com; techwg at sipforum.org
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency

Are you expecting the PBXs to do real time text? Did I miss that in the
spec?

On Feb 12, 2009, at 7:48 AM, Gunnar Hellstrom wrote:

> The requirement to pass media lines and corresponding parameter lines 
> and media packets is the temporary rescue we have for real- time text 
> until you are prepared to take that into the spec. It is vital for 
> example for emergency service calling.
> It will be a line like
> m=text 444444 AVP/RTP 101 102
> and a set of parameter lines.
>
> I am however not totally convinced that it works to be transparent for 
> one medium and intercepting others. Is it not a need to modify c- 
> fields etc along the route to make media take the right path?
>
> Gunnar
>
>
> From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:techwg- 
> bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 8:10 AM
> To: fluffy at cisco.com; mdolly at att.com
> Cc: techwg at sipforum.org
> Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency
>
> Yeah, at a minimum the document needs to explain the scenarios to 
> which the requirement applies.
>
> > Me too.
> >
> > On Feb 11, 2009, at 8:27 AM, DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Shaun
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org <techwg-bounces at sipforum.org>
> > > To: Horvath, Ernst <ernst.horvath at siemens.com>; Theo
> Zourzouvillys <theo at crazygreek.co.uk
> > > >
> > > Cc: techwg at sipforum.org <techwg at sipforum.org>
> > > Sent: Wed Feb 11 10:25:38 2009
> > > Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency
> > >
> > >
> > >> Transparency is only intended for connections from one PBX user 
> > >> to another PBX user. Why should that be prohibited as long as 
> > >> bandwidth limits are obeyed and the PBX owner pays for the 
> > >> transport as such, if the media passes through the SP network at 
> > >> all - it may well go directly end-to-end, in which case only 
> > >> transparency for the SDP body would be required.
> > >> Transparency can be settled by a service level agreement between 
> > >> enterprise and SP.
> > >
> > > This all argues that the SP MAY pass through unknown media lines 
> > > and/or codecs (based on service level agreements). The text as 
> > > written REQUIRES the SP to always allow through unknown media, 
> > > whether or not there is an agreement and not just for the direct 
> > > media case.
> > >
> > > I cannot imagine an SP agreeing to that.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Shaun
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Horvath, Ernst [mailto:ernst.horvath at siemens.com]
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:48 AM
> > >> To: Bharrat, Shaun; Theo Zourzouvillys
> > >> Cc: techwg at sipforum.org
> > >> Subject: RE: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency
> > >>
> > >> Shaun,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org 
> > >>> [mailto:techwg-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Bharrat, Shaun
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:56 PM
> > >>> To: Theo Zourzouvillys
> > >>> Cc: techwg at sipforum.org
> > >>> Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency
> > >>>
> > >>> Theo:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> In which case, the call would be terminating on an UA inside
> the
> > >>>> SP-SSEs network (i.e, a PSTN gateway) - the above text,
> > >> *end to end*
> > >>>> transparency, is relevant to SP-SSE SIP elements between
> > >> the UAC and
> > >>>> the UAS.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm not sure what you are getting at. I would think that if
> > >> phone A on
> > >>> a PBX in enterprise A calls phone B on a PBX in enterprise
> > >> B, then the
> > >>> media would (or certainly could) traverse the SP-SSE network.  
> The
> > >>> SP-SSE cannot be obliged to allow an unqualified media path
> through
> > >>> its network.
> > >>
> > >> Transparency is only intended for connections from one PBX user 
> > >> to another PBX user. Why should that be prohibited as long as 
> > >> bandwidth limits are obeyed and the PBX owner pays for the 
> > >> transport as such, if the media passes through the SP network at 
> > >> all - it may well go directly end-to-end, in which case only 
> > >> transparency for the SDP body would be required.
> > >> Transparency can be settled by a service level agreement between 
> > >> enterprise and SP.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Ernst Horvath
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm probably just completely misunderstanding your point.
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>> Shaun
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: Theo Zourzouvillys [mailto:theo at crazygreek.co.uk]
> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:54 AM
> > >>>> To: Bharrat, Shaun
> > >>>> Cc: techwg at sipforum.org
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] Media line Transparency
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Bharrat, Shaun 
> > >>>> <SBharrat at sonusnet.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> I missed this in Section 6.1 before...
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> SP-SSEs
> > >>>>> 1. MUST accommodate unsupported (and unrecognized)
> > >> media types by
> > >>>>> passing SDP media lines and attributes unchanged, and
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Am I misreading this or is this saying that an SP-SSE
> > >>>> effectively is
> > >>>>> barred from mediating or policing the media should the
> > >>>> SIP-PBX provide
> > >>>>> an unknown codec? I cannot understand how this can be a
> > >>> MUST. If an
> > >>>>> enterprise pays for G711, the SP-SSE should not be
> > >>>> obligated to accept
> > >>>>> anything else, whether or not it understands the other
> > >>> media lines
> > >>>>> and/or codecs.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Can someone elaborate.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In which case, the call would be terminating on an UA inside
> the
> > >>>> SP-SSEs network (i.e, a PSTN gateway) - the above text,
> > >> *end to end*
> > >>>> transparency, is relevant to SP-SSE SIP elements between
> > >> the UAC and
> > >>>> the UAS.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ~ Theo
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Theo Zourzouvillys
> > >>>> Chief Technical Officer
> > >>>> VoIP.co.uk - Commerce House, Telford Road, Bicester, OX26 4LD
> > >>>> Tel: +44 1908 764 196
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> techwg mailing list
> > >>> Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org Unsubscribe or edit options 
> > >>> at:
> > >>> http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > techwg mailing list
> > > Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org
> > > Unsubscribe or edit options at: 
> > > http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > techwg mailing list
> > > Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org
> > > Unsubscribe or edit options at: 
> > > http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > techwg mailing list
> > Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org
> > Unsubscribe or edit options at: 
> > http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg

__________ NOD32 3848 (20090212) Information __________

Detta meddelande dr genomsvkt av NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.nod32.com