[EME] Is this IMS?

Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> Mon, 18 June 2007 19:23 UTC

Return-path: <eme-bounces@irtf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0MpN-00063D-DG; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:23:53 -0400
Received: from [] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0MpM-000635-Hg for eme@irtf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:23:52 -0400
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0MpJ-00020q-0j for eme@irtf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:23:52 -0400
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2007 19:23:47 -0000
Received: from p549853D3.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO []) [] by mail.gmx.net (mp036) with SMTP; 18 Jun 2007 21:23:47 +0200
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+n1Dg2vrynkJ//b0QsC2cjarCGX4P9PyioGT/M+F +BUXNTeYcO31k8
Message-ID: <4676DBC1.9060201@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:23:45 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20070604)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: eme@irtf.org
References: <E6F7A586E0A3F94D921755964F6BE006C9800E@EXCHANGE2.cs.cornell.edu>
In-Reply-To: <E6F7A586E0A3F94D921755964F6BE006C9800E@EXCHANGE2.cs.cornell.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
Subject: [EME] Is this IMS?
X-BeenThere: eme@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: end-middle-end research group <eme.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/eme>
List-Post: <mailto:eme@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: eme-bounces@irtf.org

Hi all,

I went through the requirements draft and the strawman proposal. 
Initially, I did not plan to comment because I just wasn't quite sure 
whether I misunderstood the entire proposal completely.

When I first read the document then I got the impression that all this 
stuff already exists. I thought that you are replicating the 3GPP IMS 
work (without referencing it). The only difference I saw was that backup 
paths were established but I wasn't quite sure whether this is a good 
idea anyway.

So, what is the new idea about combining SIP (name-based routing) with 
path-coupled signaling?


PS: I haven't read the recent HIP proposal 

EME mailing list