Re: [Sipping] A new draft on P2P SIP

[Arjun Roychowdhury <[e-mail]>]

Philip:

some quick comments:

*) Is this document a requirements document or an archirecture
document ? It seems to have a little of both. Also, before we have a
requirements specification on what a P2P network must do, one needs to
have a common understanding/agreement on what really is a SIP P2P
network and what goals it acheives. Your draft seems to concentrate
only on telephony features. I am not sure if this is the only
motivation. Either way, I would like to see more discussion on the
scope

*) I would suggest you not use the term that this draft addresses
"Industrial-Strength" P2P while others may not. I believe one of the
goals of the IETF is to specify real-life/stable solutions/protocols
and I am sure this would also be the goal for any alternate drafts. If
you believe that your I-D addresses a different network from others,
do state it as so (I believe that is your intent)

*) I don't believe the abstract of the draft really summarizes what is
the scope of the document. For example, the draft mainly focuses on
the need to provide the same functionality a PBX has without really
having one. However, it does not talk about challenges in user/node
discovery, fault management, cross network interop issues, Firewall
traversal   and such that a p2p network may address. If these are not
addressed, then the scope of just replacing a PBX will intelligent
phones in a defined/closed network becomes a much simpler issue.

*) Section 3 seems to reccomend a functional architecture at a
simple/20,000 feet view. I am not sure if this should be a part of a
document when the need/scope/requirements are yet to be fleshed out.
Also, since Section 3 is at such a high level, it is difficult to be
able to discuss/argue on the need/functionality of this 3 level
architecture.



regds
arjun


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:24:25 -0500, Philip Matthews
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> My co-worker, Behrouz Poustchi, and I have submitted a brief draft
> contributing to the discussion around P2P SIP. In it, we present some
> features that we would like to see considered in any P2P SIP standard
> (or whatever it is going to be), based on our experience in this area.
> 
> We are new to the SIPPING working group, but we hope that our draft
> is a positive contribution to the subject, and would be happy to
> participate in any work that is done in this area.
> 
> The draft is available at:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-matthews-sipping-p2p-industrial-strength-00.txt
> 
> Comments on the draft are very welcome.
> 
> - Philip Matthews
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
> Use [e-mail] for new developments of core SIP
> 


-- 
Arjun Roychowdhury

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