[VOIPSEC] FYI - IETF seeking comment on requirements for SBC functionality... Fwd: Last Call: draft-ietf-sipping-sbc-funcs (Requirements from SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Session Border Control Deployments) to Informational RFC

[Dan Wing]

Diana Cionoiu wrote:
> Hello Dan,
> 
> Your point is valid, a better name for a SIP softswitch will be B2BUA.

Section 3 of draft-ietf-sipping-sbc-funcs describes SBC functions:

      1. Topology Hiding
      2. Media Traffic Management
      3. Fixing Capability Mismatches
      4. Maintaining SIP-related NAT Bindings
      5. Access Control
      6. Protocol Repair
      7. Media Encryption

It's true that several those functions could be done by a pure B2BUA 
without terminating media (3; the SIP signaling aspect of 4; the SIP 
signaling aspect of 5; and 6).  The others do require terminating
media (RTP or SRTP), which is where we leave the domain of a
pure signaling-only B2BUA and move towards an SBC.


The whole thing is a slippery definition, though -- should a
SIP network element that removes a codec from the SDP, and does
nothing else, really be considered a B2BUA.  Afterall, it can
remove the codec and remain stateless, and statefulness is one
of tests of a B2BUA (modifying the body is another test).

-d


> Diana
> 
> Dan Wing wrote:
>> Diana Cionoiu wrote:
>>> Maybe I'm old fashion but this document describe pretty much like a 
>>> normal SIP softswitch?
>>
>> The term 'softswitch' is not defined in SIP.  Rather, the term 'proxy' 
>> is defined (in RFC3261).  The big difference between a SIP proxy
>> and an SBC is which SIP headers are changed and if the SDP is changed.
>> A SIP proxy doesn't modify the SDP; an SBC does (in order to
>> cause the media stream to be directed to the SBC or to a DBE (data
>> border element)).
>>
>> -d
>>
>>
>>> Diana
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan York wrote:
>>>> VOIPSEC readers,
>>>>
>>>> FYI, the IETF is seeking comments on this document about 
>>>> requirements  related to Session Border Controller (SBC) 
>>>> deployments.  If you have  comments or opinions about these 
>>>> requirements, I would encourage you  to submit them soon.
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-sbc- 
>>>>> funcs-04.txt
>>>>>     
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org>
>>>>> Date: January 2, 2008 4:38:05 PM EST
>>>>> To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce at ietf.org>
>>>>> Cc: sipping at ietf.org
>>>>> Subject: Last Call: draft-ietf-sipping-sbc-funcs (Requirements 
>>>>> from  SIP  (Session Initiation Protocol) Session Border Control   
>>>>> Deployments) to Informational RFC
>>>>> Reply-To: ietf at ietf.org
>>>>>
>>>>> The IESG has received a request from the Session Initiation Proposal
>>>>> Investigation WG (sipping) to consider the following document:
>>>>>
>>>>> - 'Requirements from SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) Session Border
>>>>>    Control Deployments '
>>>>>    <draft-ietf-sipping-sbc-funcs-04.txt> as an Informational RFC
>>>>>
>>>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>>>>> final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments 
>>>>> to  the
>>>>> ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2008-01-16. Exceptionally,
>>>>> comments may be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please
>>>>> retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>>>>
>>>>> The file can be obtained via
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-sbc- 
>>>>> funcs-04.txt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi? 
>>>>> command=view_id&dTag=15491&rfc_flag=0
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> IETF-Announce mailing list
>>>>> IETF-Announce at ietf.org
>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>>>>>     
>>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Voipsec mailing list
>>> Voipsec at voipsa.org
>>> http://voipsa.org/mailman/listinfo/voipsec_voipsa.org
>>>
>>>
> 
>