[VOIPSEC] Open SBC?

Thu May 10 08:51:12 CDT 2007

Indeed - thank you for that link - after I wrote the e-mail, I  
scratched my chin for a second and wondered what drafts were floating  
out there.  Maybe it was longer than a year ago I was working on this  
- the battle was raging back then. Good to see it's being actively  
worked on.  Interesting, though, how even this draft addresses the  
"SIP unfriendliness" of SBCs, yet correctly identifies issues such as  
topology  hiding and media traffic shaping that SIP simply doesn't  
address.

Thanks for the catch... Nonetheless, I would still feel like lunch.

Thomas

On May 10, 2007, at 5:14 AM, Gaurav Kheterpal wrote:

> Thomas,
>
> You mentioned:-
>
> "SBCs aren't described in any standards body I'm aware of, and  
> certainly not
> in SIP. In fact, SBCs are quite antithetical to SIP architecture  
> design and
> principles."
>
> FWIW, that's not true. SIPPING has been actively working on  
> standardizing
> SBC functions. You might want to go through draft-ietf-sipping-sbc- 
> funcs-03
> available at
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-sbc- 
> funcs-03.txt
>
> Regards,
> Gaurav
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: voipsec-bounces at voipsa.org [mailto:voipsec- 
>> bounces at voipsa.org] On
>> Behalf Of howethomas at aol.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 9:42 PM
>> To: klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at; Martyn.Davies at dialogic.com
>> Cc: voipsec at voipsa.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOIPSEC] Open SBC?
>>
>>  Hi Martyn -
>>
>>  More fuel for the fire -
>>
>>  Yes, I did some work on doing an OpenSBC last year, but I decided  
>> to drop
>> the effort when I couldn't resolve the standards issue. SBCs aren't
>> described in any standards body I'm aware of, and certainly not in  
>> SIP. In
>> fact, SBCs are quite antithetical to SIP architecture design and
>> principles. I'm not going to go into any comments about who's to  
>> blame for
>> this one : the SIP architects for failing to understand there is a  
>> place
>> in networks to capture and enforce business rules across network
>> boundaries, or SBC manufacturers for throwing all the  
>> functionality they
>> could into a single-point-of-failure device, without a common  
>> industry
>> definition for what it is or what it does. I visualize two hungry  
>> dogs
>> around the food bowl - I don't want to be lunch.
>>
>>  So, to answer your question : you could do much of what most SBCs  
>> do with
>> the Asterisk and SER approach that Klaus suggests, or with  
>> Freeswitch, or
>> you could call Henry Sinnreich and get a lecture about why you  
>> would want
>> to do something as silly as deploy an SBC in the first place.
>>
>>  Thomas
>>     ================================
>>  Thomas S. Howe
>>  howethomas at aol.com - http://www.thomashowe.com
>>  (508) 364-9972
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at
>>  To: Martyn.Davies at dialogic.com
>>  Cc: voipsec at voipsa.org
>>  Sent: Wed, 9 May 2007 3:52 AM
>>  Subject: Re: [VOIPSEC] Open SBC?
>>
>>   Hi Martyn!
>>
>> It depends on features you require from a SBC. E.g. ser/openser is  
>> very
>> powerful for NAT traversal. There are also modules to block DoS
>> (pike/ratelimit).
>>
>> For other features like topology hiding and call tear down you need a
>> B2BUA, thus ser/openser can't be used - but Asterisk.
>>
>> Thus, if you want an openser source SBC you can combine (open)ser and
>> Asterisk nad you will have a very flexible SBC - but of course it  
>> will
>> be lot of work for configuration and wont run out-of-the-box like
>> commercial SBCs.
>>
>> regards
>> klaus
>>
>>
>> Martyn Davies wrote:
>>> I put a call out on my blog the other day
>>> (http://martyndavies.livejournal.com/27327.html) about whether  
>>> any group
>>> had tried putting together an open source Session Border  
>>> Controller.  I
>>> got some interesting responses, but I wanted to throw the  
>>> question up to
>>> a wider audience.  Does anyone on the Voipsec list know of such a  
>>> thing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Or taking a slightly different tack, is anyone familiar enough with
>>> Freeswitch (http://www.freeswitch.org/) to comment on the  
>>> feasibility of
>>> building an SBC with Freeswitch?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>
>>> Martyn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> | Martyn Davies, Principal Consultant
>>>
>>> | Dialogic
>>>
>>> | Kings Chase, 107-123 King St, Maidenhead, SL6 1DP, UK
>>> | Tel:  +44 1628 641 790 x 210
>>>
>>> | Cell: +44 7881 908 381
>>>
>>> | Follow Me: +44 7031 911 586
>>>
>>> | martyn.davies at dialogic.com <mailto:martyn.davies at dialogic.com>
>>>
>>> | blog: http://www.dialogic.com/drc <http://www.dialogic.com/drc>
>>>
>>> | blog: http://voipsa.org/blog <http://voipsa.org/blog>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Company Registration Number 2017909
>>>
>>> Registered in England and Wales
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This e-mail is intended only for the named recipient(s) and may  
>>> contain
>>> information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
>>> disclosure under applicable law. No waiver of privilege,  
>>> confidence or
>>> otherwise is intended by virtue of communication via the  
>>> internet. Any
>>> unauthorized use, dissemination or copying is strictly  
>>> prohibited. If
>>> you have received this e-mail in error, or are not named as a  
>>> recipient,
>>> please immediately notify the sender and destroy all copies of this
>>> e-mail.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Voipsec mailing list
>>> Voipsec at voipsa.org
>>> http://voipsa.org/mailman/listinfo/voipsec_voipsa.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Voipsec mailing list
>> Voipsec at voipsa.org
>> http://voipsa.org/mailman/listinfo/voipsec_voipsa.org
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________ 
>> ___
>> AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's  
>> free
>> from AOL at AOL.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Voipsec mailing list
>> Voipsec at voipsa.org
>> http://voipsa.org/mailman/listinfo/voipsec_voipsa.org
>