Subject: [p2p-sip] Draft charter for possible P2PSIP WG

From: royrr at us.saic.com (Roy, Radhika R.)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:35:14 -0500

It is now becoming confusing. 

People thought that p2p-SIP will address the FW/NAT crossing as well for
VoIP services, and a lot of people spent energies discussing this. Is there
any WG in the IETF that is working on solving problems using p2p model per
se?

Will the magic of p2p-SIP not work here? If not, why not?

What are the items of the charter of p2p-SIP then? David, do you like to
provide inputs on this?

BR/Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: dean.willis at softarmor.com [mailto:dean.willis at softarmor.com
<mailto:dean.willis at softarmor.com> ]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 3:22 PM
To: Roy, Radhika R.
Cc: David Barrett; Pyda Srisuresh; P2P-SIP
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft charter for possible P2PSIP WG

If I may:

1) Getting SIP to work across NAT boundaries is not our problem here.  

It's a real problem, but one for another working group.

2) If we're not actually talking about the scope of the dra t  

charter, let;'s change the thread title, as this title is misleading.

--

Dean

On Jan 23, 2006, at 12:41 PM, Roy, Radhika R. wrote:

> David and Suresh:

> I agree with David that our focus should be p2p-SIP and hence we  

> will work first how SIP can traverse FWs/NATs to provide VoIP  

> services because p2p-SIP is also not a general purpose protocol.

> Best regards,

> Radhika

> -----Original Message-----

> From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu [mailto:p2p-sip- <mailto:p2p-sip->  

> bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of David Barrett

> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 12:17 PM

> To: Pyda Srisuresh; Philip Matthews; Dean Willis

> Cc: P2P-SIP

> Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft charter for possible P2PSIP WG

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Pyda Srisuresh [mailto:srisuresh at yahoo.com
<mailto:srisuresh at yahoo.com> ]

> > [suresh] OK. However, several P2P applications that do not use  

> SIP will

> > also

> > need NAT-penetration service.

> No doubt.  But I'm afraid attempting to satisfy everyone by  

> abstracting out

> a new, general purpose NAT-traversal algorithm might end up satisfying

> nobody.

> (ie, if everyone has either size 4 or size 8 feet, size 6 shoes  

> don't help.)

> Our primary audience is the SIP community, so we MUST satisfy  

> them.  We CAN

> satisfy others, but needn't.  As such, I recommend we make SIP  

> "just work"

> across NATs, and then encourage anyone who wants NAT traversal to  

> use SIP

> (even if not a VoIP application).

> -david

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/p2p-sip/attachments/20060123/34584249/attachment-0001.html

---

From: henry at pulver.com (Henry Sinnreich)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:44:27 -0600

> Is there any WG in the IETF that is working on solving problems using p2p
model per se?

Excellent question!

http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/p2prg/ 

Thanks, Henry

  _____  

From: Roy, Radhika R. [mailto:royrr at us.saic.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 2:35 PM
To: dean.willis at softarmor.com
Cc: P2P-SIP
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft charter for possible P2PSIP WG

BR/Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: dean.willis at softarmor.com [mailto:dean.willis at softarmor.com]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 3:22 PM
To: Roy, Radhika R.
Cc: David Barrett; Pyda Srisuresh; P2P-SIP
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft charter for possible P2PSIP WG

If I may:

--

Dean

> From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu [mailto:p2p-sip- 

> > From: Pyda Srisuresh [mailto:srisuresh at yahoo.com]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/p2p-sip/attachments/20060123/98ee1b9c/attachment.html

---

From: dean.willis at softarmor.com (Dean Willis)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:00:53 -0600

On Jan 23, 2006, at 2:35 PM, Roy, Radhika R. wrote:

> People thought that p2p-SIP will address the FW/NAT crossing as  
> well for VoIP services, and a lot of people spent energies  
> discussing this. Is there any WG in the IETF that is working on  
> solving problems using p2p model per se?

What magic are you talking about?
> What are the items of the charter of p2p-SIP then? David, do you  
> like to provide inputs on this?

If there's something special that''s needed to get the "P2P aspects"  
of what we're doing (insertion into a P2P "cloud" or discovery of a  
correspondent from a P2p "cloud")  across a NAT boundary, I think  
that's within our scope.

Using P2P techniques for correspondent and resource discovery to  
specifically discover the resources like NAT and STUN servers that  
allow us to get SIP across a NAT is within scope.

But OTHER WORKING GROUPS are responsible for defining mechanisms to  
get SIP across NATs. I don't believe changing the way SIP crosses NAT  
boundaries is within our scope.

And solving the NAT problem in a general way is CLEARLY outside the  
scope of a "P2P-SIP" group.

--
Dean