Subject: RE: [SIP] Authentication and billing through proxy/re-direct serv er

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 02:27:34 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosen, Brian [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:14 PM
> To: 'Jiri Kuthan'; Rosen, Brian; Ashhar Farhan; [email-masked]'
> Subject: RE: [SIP] Authentication and billing through proxy/re-direct
> serv er
> 
> 
> <moved to [email-masked]>
> 
> I don't want to cast this in terms of billing == too narrow.
> I want to be able to get information about a call out of
> all of the devices in a call, including the proxies and the
> UAs, and that includes the gateways.  The information I want to
> get is statistics about the call.
> 
> I CAN do this with another interface; Radius for example, or SNMP.
> I suspect it might be better, for UAs at least, to send this
> call-related info up the chain to a proxy server.  If I don't,
> then I force EVERY device in my network to have to implement this
> other interface, whatever it is.

I really, really disagree that we should ever be propagating usage
information in SIP in order to avoid interfaces between multiple elements
and backened recording servers. Why? Well, what information is needed
depends a WHOLE lot on the service being offered, the billing models, the
operational requirements, etc. Since it depends on the service being
offered, standardizing a protocol extension for conveying this information
is akin to standardizing the set of services one might eventually offer. I
think people know my opinion on standardizing all the services on might
offer... horrible idea. 

So, the idea is to buy SIP elements (proxies, gateways, media servers, etc.)
that can generate usage recording with every darn piece of information one
might ever want to see, and make it nicely configurable. Then, depending on
the service you offer, different information is generated.

Its very likely that more complex services will require usage information
from elements beyond just the gateways (although call duration is only
reliably obtained from gateways, as people have observed). But, my
observation is that this is why billing mediation companies exist; to
collect information from multiple elements, and aggregate them together to
provide a coherent view of the service being offered.

-Jonathan R.
---
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip

---

From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:39:57 -0500

Jonathan,

Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:                    (Thu, 21 Jun 2001 02:27:34)
> provide a coherent view of the service being offered.
The corellation and agrgregation approach normally precludes the entire
range of real-time billing services.  This spectrum of real-time billing
services include popular services like pre-paid service (checking remaining
balance mid-call), and simple traditional services like time and charges.

Anybody can come up with a cool service, but being able to order, provision
and bill it becomes easier with the availalbility of a full range of ordering,
provisioning and billing mechanisms.  Ruling out the protocol elements
necessary to support a real time billing mechanism because you "don't like it"
or because you think it is the responsibilty of something other than call
control is IMHO irresponsible.

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email-masked]
http://www.openss7.org/