On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 21:36 -0500, Alex Balashov wrote: > Kristian Kielhofner wrote: > > > I know you (Alex) are a proponent of direct media handoff (as am I). > > Are you suggesting I should not be? > > Personally, I can't understand why anyone would ever shunt customer > media into their network except to work out intractable NAT issues. >
in the US CALEA may make you do that, other places may have similar legislation. Because of the LCR issues and other things the central contact would be the ITSP that the calls are routed through. Now if you are an interconnected VoIP provider in the US you have to be CALEA ready if I recall correctly. As a result, you are not supposed to tip your hand that you are monitoring media, and if someone notices that the IPs changed to goto you where before it was all direct to the upstream you are alerting them that something funky is going on, which is illegal. This may be something some have considered when they opt to handle the media themselves, although my guess is that most do it because that is the default way of handling it and others do it to hide who they are sending the calls to. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel pgp key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8AE5C721
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
