SIP Connection Reuse Efficiency Rohan Mahy—Airespace

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Indication of support for keep- alive draft-holmberg-sip-keep-03 Christer Holmberg
Advertisements

SIP, Firewalls and NATs Oh My!. SIP Summit SIP, Firewalls and NATs, Oh My! Getting SIP Through Firewalls Firewalls Typically.
IETF 71 SIPPING WG meeting draft-ietf-sipping-pai-update-00.
Slide #1 Event Package for Device Information Mahfuzur Rahman Brijesh Kumar
思科网络技术学院理事会. 1 Addressing the Network – IPv4 Network Fundamentals – Chapter 6.
RFC 3489bis Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Technical Changes Needed Allow STUN over TCP –Driver: draft-ietf-sip-outbound Allow response to omit CHANGED-
IS333, Ch. 26: TCP Victor Norman Calvin College 1.
Address Settlement by Peer to Peer (ASP) Jonathan Rosenberg Cullen Jennings Eric Rescorla.
1 © 2004 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Making NATs work for Online Gaming and VoIP Dr. Cullen Jennings
January 23-26, 2007 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida An introduction to SIP Simon Millard Professional Services Manager Aculab.
SIP Working Group Stuff Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. sip and sips General problem –What should gruu say about relationship of sips to gruu? Specific questions –If the.
GRUU Mechanism Jonathan Rosenberg. Status Draft-rosenberg-sipping-gruu-reqs-01 defines the problem Draft-rosenberg-sip-gruu submitted with proposed solution.
Secure Remote Access & Lync Ilse Van Criekinge
17 th Jan 06 IP40 Sales Brief. 2Plantronics, Inc. Contact Center Desktop – The changes Infrastructure in the contact center is now following the trends.
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF)‏ IETF 74, March 2009, San Francisco, CA (USA)‏ Vijay K. Gurbani Eric Burger Humberto Abdelnur.
SIP? NAT? NOT! Traversing the Firewall for SIP Call Completion Steven Johnson President, Ingate Systems Inc.
NAT Traversal Speaker: Chin-Chang Chang Date:
S/MIME Certificates Cullen Jennings
CS332, Ch. 26: TCP Victor Norman Calvin College 1.
Jun Li DHCP Option for Access Network Information draft-lijun-dhc-clf-nass-option-01.
Cullen Jennings Certificate Directory for SIP.
SIP, SDP and VoIP David A. Bryan CSCI 434/534 December 6, 2003.
SIPPING IETF 57 Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
TURN -01 Changes and Issues Rohan Mahy BEHAVE at IETF66 - Montreal.
DNS SRV and NAPTR Use for SPEERMINT - Tom Creighton, Gaurav Khandpur Comcast SPEERMINT Intermin Meeting Philadelphia Sept
7/6/20061 Speermint Use Case for Cable IETF 66 Yiu L. Lee JULY 2006.
S/MIME and Certs Cullen Jennings
1 SPEERMINT Use Cases for Cable IETF 66 Montreal 11 JULY 2006 Presented by Yiu L. Lee.
Insert Your Name Insert Your Title Insert Date Client Registration Open Issues Update 5/27/2011 Denis Pochuev (original proposal by Alan Frindell)
Simon Millard Professional Services Manager Aculab – booth 402 The State of SIP.
Security, NATs and Firewalls Ingate Systems. Basics of SIP Security.
RTSP to Draft Standard draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2236bis-02.txt Authors: Henning Schulzrinne, Anup Rao, Robert Lanphier, Magnus Westerlund.
Peering: A Minimalist Approach Rohan Mahy IETF 66 — Speermint WG.
1 IETF 72 SIP WG meeting SIP Identity issues John Elwell et alia.
SIP working group IETF#70 Essential corrections Keith Drage.
RTCWEB Considerations for NATs, Firewalls and HTTP proxies draft-hutton-rtcweb-nat-firewall- considerations A. Hutton, T. Stach, J. Uberti.
Congestion Safety Changes and Issues draft-ietf-sip-congestsafe-01.
SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-term-01 draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-01 March 22, 2010 Prof. Carol Davids, Illinois Inst. of Tech.
Making SIP NAT Friendly Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft.
Packet Format Issues #227: Need Shim Header to indicate Crypto Property of packet Do we need to add pre-amble header to indicate if data is encrypted or.
Multipath TCP ACM Queue, Volume 12 Issue 2, pp. 1-12, February 2014 Christoph Paasch and Olivier Bonaventure University College London 1.
Requirements for Peer protocol draft-jiang-p2psip-peer-protocol-requirement-00.txt Jiang XingFeng (Johnson) P2PSIP WG, IETF #68.
TURN Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Changes since last version Moved to behave terminology Many things moved into STUN –Basic request/response formation.
- 1 -P. Kyzivatdraft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 Reg Event Package Extensions draft-sipping-gruu-reg-event-00 IETF64 Nov-2005.
RFC3261 (Almost) Robert Sparks. SIPiT 10 2 Status of the New SIP RFC Passed IETF Last Call In the RFC Editor queue Author’s 48 hours review imminent IMPORTANT:
Name that User John Elwell Cullen Jennings Venkatesh Venkataramanan
Connected Party ID (considered evil) Who I’m Talking To Cullen Jennings
March 20, 2007BLISS BOF IETF-681 Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol.
GRUU Jonathan Rosenberg Cisco Systems. Changes in -06 Editorial as a result of RFC-ED early copy experiment.
July 28, 2008BLISS WG IETF-721 The Multiple Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) draft-johnston-bliss-mla-req-02 Alan Johnston.
Outbound draft-ietf-sip-outbound-01 Cullen Jennings.
Slide #1 Nov 6 -11, 2005SIP WG IETF64 Feature Tags with SIP REFER draft-ietf-sip-refer-feature-param-00 Orit
The “application” Profile Type (draft-channabasappa-sipping-app-profile-type-01) Sumanth Channabasappa Josh Littlefield Salvatore Loreto 70th IETF, Vancouver,
SIP Overload Control draft-hilt-sipping-overload-00 Volker Hilt Daryl Malas Indra Widjaja
Draft-ietf-p2psip-base-08 Cullen Jennings Bruce Lowekamp Eric Rescorla Salman Baset Henning Schulzrinne March 25, 2010.
SIP Congestion Safety Open Issues. Background SIP over UDP uses retransmissions timers within each transaction with exponential backoffs to provide reliability.
Slide title In CAPITALS 50 pt Slide subtitle 32 pt Flow Distribution Rule Language for Multi-Access Nodes draft-larsson-mext-flow-distribution-rules-01.
Session-ID Requirements at IETF83 draft-jones-ipmc-session-id-reqts-01 Paul Jones, Gonzalo Salgueiro, James Polk, Laura Liess, Parthasarathi Ravindran,
1Security for Service Providers – Dave Gladwin – Newport Networks – SIP ’04 – 22-Jan-04 Security for Service Providers Protecting Service Infrastructure.
SIP connection tracking
Cullen Jennings S/MIME Certificates Cullen Jennings
Jonathan Rosenberg dynamicsoft
Examining Session Policy Topologies
Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) draft-johnston-bliss-mla-req-00.
Session-ID Requirements at IETF83
Peer-to-Peer Protocol (P2PP)
Debashish Purkayastha, Dirk Trossen, Akbar Rahman
Jiang XingFeng (Johnson) P2PSIP WG, IETF #68
draft-ietf-p2psip-base-03
Presentation transcript:

SIP Connection Reuse Efficiency Rohan Mahy—Airespace

Existing Connection Reuse Draft Per WG consensus in San Diego, now only talks about connection reuse of mutually authenticated TLS connections for efficiency purposes Includes informative reference to “outbound-connection” document One open issue just received from Cullen

Open Issue on Alias Name (1 of 2) Current Text (Option 1): – Name of the alias (advertised value) is from the sent- by part of the Via header field value. Verify TLS peer name corresponds with sent-by –Via: SIP/2.0/TLS proxy-farm.example.org;alias –TLS cert could contain: proxy-farm.example.org and proxy-farm.example.com

Open Issue on Alias Name (2 of 2) Cullen’s Proposal (option 2): – Name of the alias (advertised value) is from the TLS peer name. Verify sent-by part of the Via header field value corresponds with peer name –TLS peer name is sip.example.org –Via sent-by could be: sip.example.org server22.example.org

SIP Outbound Connections Cullen Jennings

Proxy UA Problems Several things stop proxies from forming a new connection to an UA: –Lack of stable endpoint address –No TLS Certificate –Firewall –NAT

Solution When UA registers, the proxy keeps track of “connection” and uses this connection for things that the proxy forwards to this UA 1.REGISTER (on conn 33) 2. INV 3. INV (on conn 33) Alice Biloxi Bob

TCP Keep Alive Option 1: CRLF Option 2: existing method (REGISTER) Option 3: new method (PING) Recommendation: CRLF

UDP Keep Alive Option 1: CRLF or 0 byte message Option 2: REGISTER Option 3: STUN Recommendation: STUN –Deals with case where residential NAT reboots

Redundant Connections Approach: Allow multiple registrations to indicate that they are equivalent connections to the device and any connection can be used This allows connection to separate farm members for building high availability systems Requires a unique device id in the registration Question: to allow or not allow Recommendation: Allow

Quick Reconnect When a device reboots, should it be able to kill previous registrations to this device This reduces load on proxies after widespread device reboots Approach is provide device id and connection id and new registration replaces any previous connection with same tuple Recommendation: Yes

What to use for Device ID? Hard phones could use MAC or other hardware identifier that was administratively unique Soft phone could use random number UUID encompasses both of these and more in a NIH way Recommendation: –Draft should suggest using UUID

Backup Slides

Intermediate Edge Proxies Solution works the same way with proxies between registrar and UA 1.REGISTER (on 33) 3. INV 3. INV (on 44) Alice Biloxi Bob Edge 2. REGISTER (on 44) 3. INV (on 33) Mapping installed on 200 to REGISTER Path header with unique value for this AOR, Contact, connection-id, instance-id Map using data from path header