Re: [Sipping] [RAI] Expert review of draft-sinnreich-sip-tools-03

[Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei at adobe.com>]

Paul,

I did not intend to go there, but since you bring it up, there are press
reports about Sprint and others preparing for an open wireless network and
Verizon opening their wireless network to large degree to various mobile
devices. (AT&T seems to be pretty open to my iPhone). I don't think this is
the place to discuss policies of specific service providers, just to make
the point they cannot be put all in the box of closed networks that exclude
innovative endpoints; for sure.

In the enterprise and most of all, on the Internet, there is also ample room
for endpoint features and services. In P2P SIP networks all features are in
the endpoints...

To make it clear: Our I-D does not exclude or even comment on network based
SIP services, but only shows the alternative of providing _rich_ services in
the endpoints as well, or even better in our opinion.

This is a good point probably to state explicitly in the I-D and thanks for
leading us to it.

Henry


On 10/21/08 1:55 PM, "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat at cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> Henry Sinnreich wrote:
>> The issue was about endpoints calling an emergency service.
>> 
>> Are you suggesting some service providers will block emergency calls from a
>> registered endpoint?
> 
> I'm saying AFAIK they don't support any endpoints other than those they
> sanction registering in the first place. Maybe you can fake them into
> believing your device is legit, but probably they are trying to prevent
> you from that.
> 
> In case of Comcast, I'm assuming you mean Comcast voice service.
> Actually, I believe that isn't even SIP - its MGCP for the phones. Or if
> you mean the comcast network service, then I don't think it will provide
> any sip emergency services.
> 
> Thanks,
> Paul
> 
>> This is a different issue of what providers allow what fixed and mobile
>> devices on their networks.
>> 
>> Henry
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/21/08 1:22 PM, "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat at cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> [I accidentally sent this to rai. trying again on the new thread.]
>>> 
>>> Eunsoo Shim wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see a reason emergency calls cannot be supported with
>>>>>> the tools listed in the document.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> Which VOIP service providers, and by what mechanism.
>>>> Vonage and Comcast. I am sure there are more.
>>>> By the mechanism I described briefly in the above.
>>> Hmm. Are you then saying that these tools are sufficient to develop a UA
>>> for attachment to Vonage and Comcast? I never would have gotten that
>>> from reading it.
>>> 
>>> And I'm surprised. AFAIK neither Vonage nor Comcast support attachment
>>> of third party sip devices to their networks - only the ones they
>>> supply. (Or am I out of date regarding their policies?)
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sipping mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
>>> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
>>> Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
>>> Use sip at ietf.org for new developments of core SIP
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sipping mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
>> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
>> Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
>> Use sip at ietf.org for new developments of core SIP
>> 

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