Subject: RE: [Sipping] Making SBCs more transparent for NAT traversal

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:01:53 +0200

Juha,

>radio on my desk runs on same batteries for months and it even 
>has amplifier in it.  so there should be no power issue with 
>mobile terminals with the keepalives unless the their radio 
>protocol is really screwed up.

I'm sure that you know that receiving signals is much different than 
transmitting signal, by about an order of a magnatude, or more.

I've tested this in a lab, and found that if you need to send keep
alives
every 30 seconds or so, you'll have about one-quarter of the battery
life,
as if you didn't send them.  Note that I just took a number of different
phones (from different manufacturers) and that's the rough measure.

You can even try this at home with your laptop and I think you might
notice
a difference.

John

_______________________________________________
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

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:11:32 +0200

> phones (from different manufacturers) and that's the rough measure.

and i tried to say that in the setup that i described, the terminal only
needs to RECEIVE, not send keepalives.  thus there should be no power
issue involved and thus no need to have something special for mobile sip
UAs.

-- juha