[SIPForum-techwg] TCP vs. UDP (SP adoption of TCP?)

Francois Audet audet at nortel.com
Fri May 23 16:17:13 EDT 2008


Bingo.
 
In fact, your chart shows that more server implementations support TCP than UDP!
 
A caveat on TLS however... I do not beleive that TLS is typically interoperable amongst vendors. So I'd like us to spend some time providing guidelines on it. I was reading 1.0 and realized that the section on TLS is very underspecified. I think this is one area that I will spend some time on.


________________________________

	From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:techwg-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Russell Bennett
	Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 11:54
	To: techwg at sipforum.org
	Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] TCP vs. UDP (SP adoption of TCP?)
	
	

	This has been a pretty long thread.  I think that almost everyone is in agreement that both UDP and TCP are both required in SC1.1, with a bias towards TCP as a REALLY MUST (or whatever language we choose) and UDP for backwards compatibility.

	 

	I just wanted to respond to one issue that has been raised several times: that only UDP is supported by the majority of SIP deployments.  

	 

	I did some research on this and, while it is impossible to get data on current installed base, I have been able to determine what would be deployed today with existing product from the overwhelming majority market share vendors.  Therefore, even if a customer had older equipment from a given vendor that only supported UDP, they have the option to upgrade to newer equipment that supports TCP or TLS.

	 

	So, the notion that anyone is somehow constrained from supporting TCP (and even TLS) is invalid.

	 

	Russell

	 

Vendor

UDP

TCP

TLS

Reference

Microsoft

N

Y

Y

http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/b/6/db641148-427b-41d3-9f20-7ffbddaf65b8/OCS_VoIP_Guide.doc <http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/b/6/db641148-427b-41d3-9f20-7ffbddaf65b8/OCS_VoIP_Guide.doc>  

Cisco

Y

Y

Y

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/FeatTLS.html#wp1092137 <http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/FeatTLS.html#wp1092137>  

IBM

N

Y

Y

http://download.boulder.ibm.com/ibmdl/pub/software/dw/lotus/sametime-sip.pdf <http://download.boulder.ibm.com/ibmdl/pub/software/dw/lotus/sametime-sip.pdf>  

Nortel

Y

Y

Y

http://www142.nortelnetworks.com/techdocs/CS1K_5_0/pdf/NN43001-564_01.05_NRS.pdf <http://www142.nortelnetworks.com/techdocs/CS1K_5_0/pdf/NN43001-564_01.05_NRS.pdf>  

Avaya

Y

Y

Y

http://www.avaya.com/gcm/master-usa/en-us/products/offers/sip_enablement_services.htm&View=ProdTechSpec <http://www.avaya.com/gcm/master-usa/en-us/products/offers/sip_enablement_services.htm&View=ProdTechSpec>  

Alcatel-Lucent

Y

Y

N

http://www1.alcatel-lucent.com/doctypes/articlepaperlibrary/pdf/ATR2002Q4/T0212-SIP_Technology-EN.pdf <http://www1.alcatel-lucent.com/doctypes/articlepaperlibrary/pdf/ATR2002Q4/T0212-SIP_Technology-EN.pdf>  

Siemens

Y

Y

Y

http://www.enterprise-communications.siemens.com/Products/Phones%20Clients/Desktop%20Phones/~/media/6DAA007008EB4A5CA0212A6D12A49770.ashx <http://www.enterprise-communications.siemens.com/Products/Phones%20Clients/Desktop%20Phones/~/media/6DAA007008EB4A5CA0212A6D12A49770.ashx>  

AudioCodes

Y

Y

Y

http://www.audiocodes.com/objects/sbc/nCite_4000.pdf <http://www.audiocodes.com/objects/sbc/nCite_4000.pdf>  

Nextpoint

Y

Y

Y

http://www.nextpointnetworks.com/files/NextPoint_SBC_USLTR_2008_hirez.pdf <http://www.nextpointnetworks.com/files/NextPoint_SBC_USLTR_2008_hirez.pdf>  

Acme Packet

Y

Y

Y

http://www.acmepacket.com/html/page.asp?PageID={06E4AEBC-24E2-46CC-BA95-7C74288FA45B} <http://www.acmepacket.com/html/page.asp?PageID=%7b06E4AEBC-24E2-46CC-BA95-7C74288FA45B%7d>  

Covergence

Y

Y

Y

http://www.covergence.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/4adf40f79f81482fff714c46d8e06832/misc/ssesb.pdf <http://www.covergence.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/4adf40f79f81482fff714c46d8e06832/misc/ssesb.pdf>  

	 

	 

	 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:techwg-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Peter Dunkley
	Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 6:40 AM
	To: Eric Burger; techwg at sipforum.org
	Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] TCP vs. UDP (SP adoption of TCP?)

	 

	That would depend on whether you consider ISDN, and the like, to be SIP related or not :-)

	 

	On a more serious note there is a requirement for tunnelling UK-ISUP within SIP messages.  Also, UK-ISUP has recently been extended to allow BT-NUP messages to be tunnelled within - specifically so that BT-NUP can be passed across a SIP network for legacy interworking.  This would result in SIP messages that can contain UK-ISUP messages, that can contain BT-NUP messages, which may contain DPNSS messages...

	 

	What you jokingly mentioned below is absolutely horrible - but (within a national context) not as unlikely as it may seem!

	 

	I have also heard of some interest in directly tunnelling DPNSS within SIP as well.

	 

	However, I would be the first to admit that BT-NUP and so on have no place in a SIPconnect recommendation.

	 

	Peter

	 

	-----Original Message-----

	From: techwg-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:techwg-bounces at sipforum.org]On

	Behalf Of Eric Burger

	Sent: 22 May 2008 10:17

	To: techwg at sipforum.org

	Subject: Re: [SIPForum-techwg] TCP vs. UDP (SP adoption of TCP?)

	 

	 

	I would offer this philosophy would lead us to standardize SIPconnect

	1.1 to use ISDN, possibly choosing Q.921, Q.sig, or BT-NUP :-)

	 

	On May 21, 2008, at 10:24 AM, Peter Dunkley wrote:

	 

	> In my opinion any recommendation needs to take into account not just

	> best practice, but actual practice.  Vilifying, or making life

	> difficult, for those who have pragmatically chosen something

	> different, and invested time and money in making it work, is not

	> going to contribute to the success of any recommendation.

	 

	_______________________________________________

	techwg mailing list

	Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org

	Unsubscribe or edit options at:  http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg

	 

	 

	NOTICE & DISCLAIMER

	This email including attachments (this "Document") is confidential and may contain legally privileged information.  If you have received this Document in error please notify the sender immediately and delete this Document from your system without using, copying, disclosing or disseminating it or placing any reliance upon its contents.  We cannot accept liability for any breaches of confidence arising through use of this Document.

	 

	The information contained in this Document is provided solely for information purposes on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including without limitation any implied warranty of satisfactory or merchantable quality, fitness for a particular purpose or freedom from error or infringement.  The user relies on the information contained herein, and its accuracy or otherwise, entirely at their own risk.

	 

	Any opinions expressed in this Document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Telsis.  We will not accept responsibility for any commitments made by our employees outside the scope of our business.

	 

	 

	 

	 

	_______________________________________________

	techwg mailing list

	Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org

	Unsubscribe or edit options at:  http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://sipforum.org/pipermail/techwg/attachments/20080523/bfa6395e/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the techwg mailing list