On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/2/24 M. Ranganathan <[email protected]>:
>> Features are implementable as User Agents. There is no need for a BACK
>> TO BACK User Agent to implement most features.
>
> Ok, perhaps you could provice a proxy solution to replace a B2BUA in
> the 3 cases I comment in other mail in this thread.
>
>
>> Notable exception :
>>
>> Session Border Controller. :-)
>
> And isn't a SBC a common requeriment? Probably it's not a good idea
> that a SIP request created in an enterprise LAN travels through
> Internet showing private fields as Via, Contact and so.
> Of course, in order to provide privacy a B2BUA is required (Via are
> not propragated, Contact is replaced...).
>
>
>> Using a B2BUA where you should be using a proxy is needless
>> complication and just bad engineering.
>
> Is there any company or enterprise using a SIP proxy instead of a
> B2BUA? really? tell me just *one* example. Of course, I expect users
> in that company can transfer incoming calls from their PSTN SIP

Separation of concerns is a good idea in Engineering design.

> provider and so.


http://www.sipfoundry.org

On the other hand, if I did come across a company using a B2BUA where
a proxy ought to be used, I might question their wisdom. Individual
companies shall not be named.


>
> Best regards.
>
>
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <[email protected]>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors



-- 
M. Ranganathan

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to