[Serusers] SER for IMS

Gaurav Kansal gkansal at velankani.com
Thu Oct 12 05:19:17 CEST 2006


Hello

 

I am in the process of evaluating a SIP stack for IMS enhancements (for
CSCF). I compared SIPx, SER and reciprocate stacks for CSCF development. 

SER:

Pros:

1.	Can run as registrar/proxy/redirect server
2.	TLS support for Security
3.	Support for NAT
4.	Web based management interface
5.	IPv6 support

Cons:

1.	GPL license

 

Resiprocate:

Pros:

1.	Slightly less distributed architecture than SIPx
2.	Can run as registrar/proxy/redirect server
3.	TLS support for Security
4.	Support for NAT
5.	Web based management interface
6.	IPv6 support
7.	Maximum standards compliance

Many IMS headers are supported in latest release 1.0

 

SIPx: 

Pros:

1.	Complete SIP based IP-PBX solution
2.	Distributed architecture
3.	Can run as registrar/proxy/redirect server
4.	TLS support for Security
5.	Support for NAT
6.	Web based management interface

Cons:

1.	Missing IPv6 support
2.	Large footprint

 

 

I have following queries:

1.	Can somebody point out if anything out of above is not correct or if
people can add more?
2.	Which stack is more actively being used for IMS enhancements?
3.	Are there any plans for near future SER release with IMS support
(CSCF mainly)?

 

Regards,

Gaurav Kansal

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20061012/ff1c39e5/attachment.htm>


More information about the sr-users mailing list