IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] SIP and GSM/UMTS with OpenBTS

Jim Forster <jim.forster@rangenetworks.com> Wed, 05 February 2014 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jim.forster@rangenetworks.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B55A1A001A for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 09:58:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IB8jrOp69w82 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 09:58:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1lp0149.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.149]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84FF41A010D for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 09:58:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BL2PR03MB404.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.91.149) by BL2PR03MB403.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.91.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.868.8; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:58:51 +0000
Received: from BL2PR03MB404.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.91.149]) by BL2PR03MB404.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.91.149]) with mapi id 15.00.0868.013; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:58:50 +0000
From: Jim Forster <jim.forster@rangenetworks.com>
To: Tim Panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] SIP and GSM/UMTS with OpenBTS
Thread-Index: AQHPIj0OkF9riHfhQ0Se4gDBfVRQX5qmwfOAgAAEiYCAAAXSgIAAJw4A
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:58:50 +0000
Message-ID: <D7A298A1-D4E8-45D9-A9CB-5C4553B3B1F0@rangenetworks.com>
References: <040E1A40-BC55-4CFC-834A-FC958DEFDE25@rangenetworks.com> <52F25265.5070108@alum.mit.edu> <00C069FD01E0324C9FFCADF539701DB3BBF2361F@sc9-ex2k10mb1.corp.yaanatech.com> <AA6CC65F-1613-4DA2-BC40-AC7BD9CE6BAD@westhawk.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <AA6CC65F-1613-4DA2-BC40-AC7BD9CE6BAD@westhawk.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [114.69.245.154]
x-forefront-prvs: 01136D2D90
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019001)(6009001)(51704005)(199002)(189002)(66066001)(59766001)(77982001)(81542001)(81342001)(79102001)(65816001)(80022001)(76796001)(80976001)(49866001)(47736001)(50986001)(47976001)(63696002)(81816001)(83322001)(83716003)(76786001)(74706001)(46102001)(93516002)(93136001)(94316002)(87266001)(53806001)(56776001)(92566001)(92726001)(33656001)(94946001)(54316002)(54356001)(36756003)(74502001)(47446002)(90146001)(76482001)(2656002)(74876001)(82746002)(74662001)(81686001)(56816005)(87936001)(85852003)(83072002)(31966008)(4396001)(69226001)(86362001)(51856001)(85306002)(74366001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BL2PR03MB403; H:BL2PR03MB404.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; CLIP:114.69.245.154; FPR:B7F4FCD5.AEB58485.4FDF3F78.6E1AB3D.201CD; InfoNoRecordsA:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6C31AD36-80C3-4D8A-93D3-52813EC950B3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: rangenetworks.com
Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] SIP and GSM/UMTS with OpenBTS
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:58:55 -0000

>> Is the end result of this improvements to the SIP or other IETF protocols?
> 
> Speaking entirely for myself (as one does in the IETF) I’d guess that the outcome might
> be some small improvements in SIP and other protocols (SDP or RTP perhaps) due to the fact
> that the usage is slightly out of the ordinary so may well trip an edge case or something.
> 
>> Or, does this attempt to standardize an architecture?
> 
> I’d like it to standardise an _interface_ so that multiple architectures can interoperate.

Agreed.

>> Also, is there any IPR attached to this?
> 
> I’ll let Jim answer that when he wakes up in India, but as an old (but lapsed) IETF hand I’m sure 
> he’s aware of the IPR rules.

Yes, lapsed IETF hand and certainly older now, so I should review the rules, etc.  I certainly believe there's no lurking patent issues from Range Networks.  I'll double check on that as well.

 -- Jim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email