Subject: Re: [dispatch] Should IETF have a BEHAVE WG for SBCs?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 20:22:09 +0800

As Muthu just shared his point in my thread, then I read this thread just 
now. Some comments: 

1. I'd like to see this work going on, as SBC is really luck of 
guidelines. 

2. It is meaningful to emphasize e2e philosophy/methodology for any B2BUA 
equipment, including SBC. Though this looks like well known rule. But 
comsidering SBC industry actuality, it is meaningful then.

Suggesting about the *potential* WG:
1. BCP level guidelines for SBC's usage of e2e defined SIP RFCs;
2. Informational/standard track solutioion draft/RFCs for RFC5853.

And I also suggest you to consult RFC5853's authors's viewpoints.

Thanks,

Gao

[dispatch] Should IETF have a BEHAVE WG for SBCs?

From: "Muthu ArulMozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal at cisco.com> 
To: "DISPATCH list" <dispatch at ietf.org> 
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 22:57:10 +0530 

In the past few years there has been a proliferation of Session Border 
Controller (SBC) deployments in SIP networks mainly because the 
development of SIP protocol specifications hasn't been able to keep in 
pace with industry and operator requirements. The common functions they 
perform and the architectural issues they introduce are described in 
RFC-5853.
 
Due to lack of well defined guidelines and best current practices many SBC 
implementations break end-to-end features and introduce problems that are 
difficult to troubleshoot, many a times because of poor implementations 
rather than to meet any specific requirements. For example, when they do 
media processing they assume everything coming on the media channel is 
RTP, don't do even basic RTP header validations as recommended in 
RFC-3550, try to decode STUN and DTLS packets as RTP corrupting them and 
making them useless.
 
I am wondering whether IETF should have a BEHAVE WG for SBCs, similar to 
the one for NATs, to set guidelines and identify best current practices to 
encourage better SBC implementations, interoperability and ease of 
troubleshooting, rather than just keeping quiet and letting them go out of 
control.
 
Comments?
 
Muthu

===================================
 Zip    : 210012
 Tel    : 87211
 Tel2   :(+86)-025-52877211
 e_mail : [email-masked]
===================================

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.