2009/2/24 Johansson Olle E <[email protected]>:
>
> 24 feb 2009 kl. 10.28 skrev Iñaki Baz Castillo:
>>
>> It's very "cool" to say that we don't need B2BUA but proxies, but I
>> would really like to know a *real* case of two independent companies
>> interconnected just with SIP proxies.
>
> I think the truth is that in the case of enterprise PBXs we need both. The
> SIP proxy, which only handles signalling, scales. Anything that handles
> media, like most b2bua's, doesn't scale easily.
Yes, the proxy could act as registrar, forking proxy, NAT keepalive...
something like:
SIP/PSTN
|
B2BUA
|
Proxy/Registrar ---- Persence Server
/ | \
phone1 phone2 phone3
There could be more B2BUA in parallel and the proxy acting as
dispatcher. But the B2BUA is required for *most* common telephony
features in an enterprise environment.
Sincerelly I don't understand why there is some obsession against
B2BUA's. The provide funcionalities unfeasible for a proxy, they are
required in most cases.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
