[OpenSER-Users] RTP-Proxy

[Andreas Granig]

Jerome,

In my opinion it depends on the policy of the VoIP provider rather than 
on technical issues.

Proper implementation of RFC 4028 of all involved UACs might render RTP 
analysis useless, if it's in line with the policy of the the VoIP 
provider to have some minutes of tolerance in their CDRs in case of 
missing BYEs (the tolerance can be controlled by the provider via the 
defined headers). If that is still unacceptable by a provider, there 
maybe should be some SIP/RTP-aware billing engines in place though.

Andreas

Jerome Martin wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 20:10 +0100, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>> El Jueves, 10 de Enero de 2008, Jerome Martin escribió:
>>
>>> To summarize, I'd say that if you rely on RTP detection for billing,
>>> then you have the following limitations :
>>> - unreliable problem detection
>>> - stuck with RTP proxying for ALL calls
>>> - problems with VAD
>>> - problems in corner cases with re INVITES changing the RTP stream
>>> extremities
>>>
>>> What do you think ?
>> I think that I should thank to you for a great explanation ;)
> 
> What, you're not even arguing ? :-) You're too kind. 
> But seriously, this is a pretty hot subject, and I've never met anyone
> suggesting the same as I did here, most of the time I hear the same
> thing about rtpproxy + CDRs reliability.
> 
> I'm sure some people are challenging what I wrote right now, in their
> mind ! If we are lucky, we'll even get emails ! 
> 
> Disclaimer: the above paragraph was not meant to start a flame war on
> the topic between SST/pinging schools and RTP detection ones. At worst,
> the two techniques can really complement each other.
> 
> Regards,