[Serusers] About B2BUA

[chang hui]

Jiri,

Thanks for your prompt response.
We want to implement a pre-paid system in which once subscriber's balance is depleted, the dialog could be torn in time. However other Proxy or other elements could not take part in the call, they could not send a BYE to caller directly. It's the why we consider B2BUA.
We project to build a B2BUA to support voice/video/IM at first stage, and support other SIP based services as they emerged.
However, I just noticed the definition of B2BUA in 2543-bis04 in several sentences,  there has no other analysis on performance, reliability, limitations and how to implement it. So, I hope to get help from the society.
Thanks for your help again.

Koalas

-----Original Message-----
From: Jiri Kuthan [mailto:jiri at iptel.org]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 11:06 PM
To: chang hui; serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] About B2BUA

Hello,

ser is not a B2BUA -- it can act as proxy, redirect, transactional UAS
or registrar. These modes make a vast majority of network scenarios
happy without a need to use a B2BUA. Which is good, because B2BUAs
inherently have certain scalability, reliability and security limitations.

Is there a particular reason why you would like to use a B2BUA?

-Jiri

At 08:00 AM 1/3/2003, chang hui wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am newbie of this field, thanks everyone help me.
>I am interesting in B2BUA, however, except some brief defination in 3261, I could not find any further defination or how to implement about B2BUA, I noticed that SER could be implemented as a B2BUA, where can I find some implementation? or where can I get any description?
>
>Koalas
>_______________________________________________
>Serusers mailing list
>serusers at lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/