[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Sip] moving UDP support out of the core SIP document
I agree with Rohan to have a default value.
Thanks, Henry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-admin@ietf.org [mailto:sip-admin@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Kevin McCandless
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 3:57 PM
> To: 'Rohan Mahy'; Victor Paulsamy
> Cc: sip@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Sip] moving UDP support out of the core SIP document
>
>
> Rohan:
>
> At first I would have to agree with Victor but you are right
> we need a base for SIP transport. I remember a white paper
> that looked at SCTP, TCP and UDP as transport protocols for
> SIP. If you were a carrier with large amounts of SIP traffic
> SCTP would be the better transport protocol. For less
> traffic that would be seen between proxy and UA then TCP
> could be used. Is it possible to the draft address the three
> transport protocols and the necessary security mechanism to
> support them. By recommending only one protocol don't we
> several limit the deployment.
>
> Just my thoughts....
>
> Kevin...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rohan Mahy [mailto:rohan@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:03 PM
> > To: Victor Paulsamy
> > Cc: sip@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Sip] moving UDP support out of the core SIP document
> >
> >
> > Hi Victor,
> >
> > Having no default transport does not encourage
> interoperability which
> > is a major goal of Internet protocols.
> >
> > thanks,
> > -rohan
> >
> > On Wednesday, October 23, 2002, at 11:23 AM, Victor Paulsamy wrote:
> >
> > > If SIP is "truly" independent of underlying transport protocols,
> > > wouldn't it
> > > be appropriate to make all transports "optional"?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > --victor
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: sip-admin@ietf.org [mailto:sip-admin@ietf.org]On
> > Behalf Of Rohan
> > >> Mahy
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:02 AM
> > >> To: sip@ietf.org
> > >> Subject: [Sip] moving UDP support out of the core SIP document
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Hello Everyone,
> > >>
> > >> I wanted to share some thoughts that I had about removing
> > UDP from the
> > >> core SIP document when we go to draft standard. We are
> probably at
> > >> least one year away from going to Draft Standard. I hope
> > that during
> > >> this time most implementations will support RFC3261, and
> therefore
> > >> support TCP. In addition, it is quite likely that when
> moving to
> > >> Draft Standard that the IESG will REQUIRE TLS support on
> SIP User
> > >> Agents. This would ensure a ubiquitous hop-by-hop
> channel security
> > mechanism,
> > >> but which requires a reliable transport (TCP or SCTP).
> > >>
> > >> Obviously UDP is still very attractive in wireless
> > networks (due to
> > >> RTT
> > >> issues) and in other typically private networks with
> > well-understood
> > >> delay and loss characteristics. To make most
> > implementations simpler
> > >> however, I am proposing that we make unreliable
> transports (UDP and
> > >> DCCP) of SIP optional in User Agents, and that we put the
> > UDP-specific
> > >> mechanism (ex: much of the complication of the transaction
> > layer for
> > >> handling retransmissions) in a separate Draft Standard
> > document. It
> > >> is
> > >> very likely that if we did this there would also be a baseline
> > >> security
> > >> mechanism for UDP as well (probably some profile of
> > IPsec). The net
> > >> effect is that SIP User Agents could also talk to each
> > other using TCP
> > >> or TLS+TCP, and that User Agents with a strong preference for UDP
> > >> would
> > >> have a consistent security mechanism. Proxies would
> still support
> > >> both
> > >> transports, so you could easily communicate between a
> TCP-only User
> > >> Agent, and as User Agent which prefers UDP without
> > requiring the User
> > >> Agent to switch over to TCP.
> > >>
> > >> I welcome your discussion and comments on this idea.
> > >>
> > >> thanks,
> > >> -rohan
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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