Subject: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-01

From: "Khan, Sohel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 15:24:27 -0400

I have some concern on the draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-01.

IMHO, in a wireless network, an expensive resource is the air-interface
and an expensive QoS parameter is the end-to-end call set up delay.
Current draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-01 increases message
flows between user agents (UAs) and network in both ends of a call. In
this draft, a UA is directly communicating both with the Proxy and the
Policy servers in both end of the network (in Figure 3 and 4). This will
consume air-interface bandwidth and increase end to end delay of a call.
Note that, in a large country, the distance between a cell phone user
and a office supporting a proxy and policy server is in hundreds of
miles. The UA's policy offer/exchange with the proxy and policy server
would significantly impact the end-to-end call set up delay performance.
A better approach would be direct rendezvous of the Proxy and the Policy
servers through SIP. Generally, proxy and policy server are co-located.
In emerging devices, proxies and policy servers are embedded inside a
single hardware. Direct communication between Proxy and Policy server
would reduce messages (2)/ack, (3), (4), (6), (7), (9), and (10) to two
message exchange in Figure 3.  Similar reduction is possible in Figure
(4). 

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Sohel Khan, Ph.D.

Product Engineering
Comcast Cable Communications

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

---

From: Volker Hilt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 11:37:20 -0400

What you are proposing is essentially the "piggyback model". There has 
been an extensive discussion of the pros and cons of piggyback vs. 
separate channel in SIPPING. A brief summary of this discussion can be 
found in Section 4.2 of draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-01.

Thanks,

Volker

Khan, Sohel wrote:
> miles. The UA’s policy offer/exchange with the proxy and policy server 
> message exchange in Figure 3.  Similar reduction is possible in Figure (4).
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you.
> 
>  
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 
> Sohel Khan, Ph.D.
> 
> Product Engineering
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>