Subject: RE: Mission focus (was Re: [Sipping]RequirementsfortheidentificationofIMScommunicationservices.)

From: "Stephen Terrill \(E2/EEM\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 16:17:15 +0200

Well, if we are on this track - a lot of modern highways (especially the
newer ones) have tolls :-o. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Sinnreich [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 3:08 PM
To: 'Mark Searle'; 'Juha Heinanen'
Cc: 'Andrew Allen'; [email-masked]; 'Dean Willis'
Subject: RE: Mission focus (was Re:
[Sipping]RequirementsfortheidentificationofIMScommunicationservices.)

Mark Searle wrote:

>There seem to be a mismatch between IMS and its view of SIP and the
IEFT's.

Indeed. It is like comparing modern highways with medieval travel paths
between well guarded castles, protected by a moat and drawbridge and
also paying toll at every passage to support the local whimsical lords.

Sorry, I could not help it :-)

Thanks, Henry

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Searle [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 2:13 AM
To: 'Juha Heinanen'
Cc: 'Andrew Allen'; [email-masked]; 'Dean Willis'
Subject: RE: Mission focus (was Re:
[Sipping]Requirementsfortheidentificationof IMScommunicationservices.)

Hi Juha,

I agree with you there.  There seem to be a mismatch between IMS and its
view of SIP and the IEFT's.  Clearly this has lead to overly complex
structures in the IMS. But, can you blame them? You implied yourself
that SIP has been somewhat subverted by companies with money and
resources.  This is the point.  It is commerce that drove the telco
sector into IP and IMS in the first place.  The internet has no doubt
benefited from this as it could not continue on state subsidies and top
slicing. Companies themselves are as much at the mercy of money as the
SIP fathers.  We all are.  We will unfortunately see a lot more of this
as legacy establishes itself.  This is also the history of the PTSN.
The technical solution has to make way for the realities of commerce and
government intervention. 

Yes, your are also correct that the IETF should stick to its guns more.
You guys understand your stuff more than anyone.  Perhaps you should be
the more of a counter weight to the commercial realities.  

Kind regards Mark.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Juha Heinanen [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 27 March 2006 05:52
To: Mark Searle
Cc: 'Dean Willis'; 'Andrew Allen'; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Mission focus (was Re: [Sipping]
Requirementsfortheidentificationof IMScommunicationservices.)

Mark Searle writes:

 > Perhaps SIP should therefore consider its position and inform the IMS
> standards body,  > rather than politely consider its requirements,
that SIP was never  > intended to support resilient communications and
the IMS is wasting its  > time.  If you really believe this you might
save them a lot of  > unnecessary work.

who said that SIP cannot be used to support resilient communications?
the outbound i-d, for example, allows a phone to connect at the same
time to more than one "telephone exchange" in case one of them is
unavailable.  i haven't see that kind of possibility in PSTN.

the problem the we constantly have with IMS "requirements" is that they
try to implement walled gardens using SIP.  IETF should have simply said
"NO" to them long time ago.  the problem was, that in the early days
(and perhaps even now) some of the SIP fathers we working for companies
whose income at least partly relied on IMS and they didn't have guts to
tell IMS guys to go home from messing up and complicating SIP.

-- juha

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use
[email-masked] for questions on current sip Use
[email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use
[email-masked] for questions on current sip Use
[email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP