Session Peering Use Cases for Federations draft-schwartz-speermint-use-cases- federations-00.txt IETF 67 – San Diego, November 2006 David Schwartz – Kayote Networks Eli Katz - XConnect Jeremy Barkan - Digitalshtick Use Cases and Patterns for VoIP Peering • Different types of peering architectures found in real world • Much discussion about kinds of peering • Need for a catalog of real use cases • Need a model [ pattern ] to talk about these use cases • Use cases express different kinds of business relationships and drives in the VoIP peering space IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG six functions or services associated with call setup across peering networks: L (Location) – Location of termination Voice Service Provider I (Interoperability) – Signaling/media compatibility with T-VSP S (Security) – Security of transport, authenticity of VSPs T (Trust) – Privacy, Identity, Auth management, SPIT R (Routing) – Priority based traffic management C (Cost) – Cost of call IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Each peering function has a policy framework associated with it consisting of : • Content – Declaration of policy requirements • Negotiation – Method for peers to reach a policy instance that meets the policy requirements of both peers • Enforcement – application of policy requirements at run time, such as in the call set up IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Location Function Policy Content Examples • Query mechanism/format of data (NAPTR, SIP 3XX) • Location of authoritative information (Remote, Local) • Type of data returned (Domain, IP) • Resolution of domain (static, DNS SRV) • Whose location returned (T-VSP, Intermediary) • O-VSP has access to (All data, Selected peers) • Data retrieval (Unlimited, Rate limited) IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Security Function Policy Content Examples • Type (IPSec, TLS) • Symmetric (IPSec IKE, mutual TLS) • Asymmetric (TLS + Digest) IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Peering Service Provider Logical network entity providing one or more of the six peering functions described above. May be co-located at one of the peered VSPs, or it may be a separate, independent entity. IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Direct – Peering Service Provider IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Complexity associated with Direct model IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Dealing with complexity Farm out to 3rd Limit functionality party IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Indirect – Peering Service Provider IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Putting it all together IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Conclusions: • Different relationships require different peering models • Direct peering does not scale very well • There is need for more than just location function • One solution is to “farm out” all functionality to 3rd party • Another solution involves • factoring out location function • Handling non location functions for some relationships • Using 3rd party for these non location functions in others IETF 67 – SPEERMINT WG Questions?
Pages to are hidden for
"Fear and Loathing in Las VoIP - PowerPoint"Please download to view full document