No offense taken, Frederik, but thanks for clarifying. I do think that the Yxa project has the right pieces to build a fast, scalable registrar/location/proxy server, and perhaps offering redirect service too. That would make a compelling SIP service component, IMO. Thoughts?
-- kobi On Oct 24, 2008, at 3:30 AM, Fredrik Thulin wrote: > Kobi Eshun wrote: >> Thanks for the hint. Answers to your related Qs inline. Cheers, >> -- >> kobi >> On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Fredrik Thulin wrote: >>> Kobi Eshun wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> I'm interested in using yxa only as a registrar and perhaps an >>>> event server, downstream of an ingress proxy that handles >>>> authentication. What is the best way to configure the >>>> incomingproxy to skip all authentication, or to authenticate by >>>> source IP/port? Thanks in advance, >>> >>> That question has been asked before. I don't get it though - why >>> do people want to bypass authentication with SIP servers, when no >>> one would even think of doing it in an e-mail server? >> For use in a trusted network of cooperating servers -- there is >> absolutely no need for any authentication. > > To be honest, I guessed this would be the answer. People build > walled gardens for SIP, but they don't for e-mail. It's an > interesting paralell though - why don't they? How come people have > passwords for their e-mail account even when accessing it using a > private corporate network, but they don't feel they need it for VoIP? > > Extending YXA to allow it to trust peers with SSL client > certificates could partially adress this, although I don't generally > consider receiving a request from a authenticated peer good enough > confirmation that said peer wants me to act on the request in a > certain way (like sending it on to a costly PSTN destination for > example). > >>> What is missing in YXA that makes you want to put it behind >>> another server anyways? >> Crikey, I can't believe you would seriously ask that! > > Sorry if I offended you - that wasn't my intention and yes, I'm very > well aware of the fact that YXA doesn't do everything possibly > needed everywhere when it comes to SIP ;). I was thinking that maybe > the reason was that your ingress server supported another > authentication backend or similar... > > the rest of your reply included for the list > > > First of all, it > > is very common to expect to receive traffic from other proxies, in > > particular for receiving PSTN traffic. In our experience, most > vendors > > prefer IP-address based authentication over 407/Proxy Auth. > > > > Second, even if YXA implemented all of the functionality a network > > operator might want, it is still desirable to avoid porting all > > existing > > application server logic to a new platform. And yes, I do have > > significant application server logic implement already for > > OpenSER/OpenSIPs. > > > > Third, YXA does not currently have all the required functionality > > readily available. What it does have is access to an elegant, > > distributed backing store for dialog state. I'd like to see if I > can > > leverage that. > > > /Fredrik _______________________________________________ Yxa-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.su.se/mailman/listinfo/yxa-devel
