[Sip] B2B UA definition

"Medhavi Bhatia" <mbhatia@nextone.com> Tue, 30 July 2002 04:05 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA24914 for <sip-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 00:05:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id AAA18272 for sip-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 00:06:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA16909; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23:36:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA16878 for <sip@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23:36:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from repulse.cnchost.com (repulse.concentric.net [207.155.248.4]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA24399 for <sip@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23:35:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from deewana (pool-138-88-40-49.res.east.verizon.net [138.88.40.49]) by repulse.cnchost.com id XAA17470; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23:36:25 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.14]
Message-ID: <00e301c2377c$48a88030$0100000a@nextone.com>
From: Medhavi Bhatia <mbhatia@nextone.com>
To: sip@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23:50:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Sip] B2B UA definition
Sender: sip-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi all,

Very many times I have seen a discussion on B2B UA's end merely in a
definition
of a B2BUA:
        "A back-to-back user agent (B2BUA) is a
         logical entity that receives a request and processes it as a
         user agent server (UAS).  In order to determine how the request
         should be answered, it acts as a user agent client (UAC) and
         generates requests.  Unlike a proxy server, it maintains dialog
         state and must participate in all requests sent on the dialogs
         it has established.  Since it is a concatenation of a UAC and
         UAS, no explicit definitions are needed for its behavior."

However I believe this is quite incomplete. For example:

1) A B2BUA behaves similar to a proxy in that it must maintain "timer C" on
outgoing transactions - which is unlike a UAC.
2) It SHOULD maintain max forwards on request in/requests out basis.
Moreover
it SHOULD have a defined relationship between incoming and outgoing
requests.
The way the definition goes, the outgoing request can have completely new
headers,
which eventually will cause a problem in loop detection/ policy and
configuration
at a remote destination. Clearly there may be reasons for new headers, but
certain
headers should be maintained for proper SIP network operation.
3) It has a notion similar to a response context of a proxy, and thus of
forking
requests
 etc etc...

I believe that the SIP rfc describes a "server" role as a stateful/stateless
proxy and
completely specifies it. However a "server" can also be implemented as a
B2BUA,
so it should talk some more about it, or the requirements should be spelled
out
somewhere. A completely loose definition might just lead to deployment
problems
in future.

-Medhavi.



_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip