> As a general observation it seemed to me the bakeoff was more useful for
> testing User Agents than Proxies. Probably because it is easier to test UAs
> through basic call setup scenarios whilst testing a proxy generally requires
> setting up >1 proxies plus many UAs. This was a shame because to debug the
> protocol further I feel we really need to run scenarios involving networks of
> SIP servers. Perhaps at the next bakeoff we can try and prearrange implementors
> roles in scenarios so that people turn up better prepared to setup and go. It
> might also help if we just ran one reliable UA in the proxy oriented tests.
This is a good idea. I suspect that many UAs will now implement the main
missing pieces (tel, re-INVITE) so that we should have more choices. I
wonder if setting up a separate proxy area in the bake-off hall would be
useful, as I found it difficult to coordinate folks across 4000 sq ft.
>
> In the meantime I am setting up our proxy server to be accessible over the
> Internet. I know some other people have already done this and others are
> planning to. Would anyone be interested in discussing building a network of
> these public servers?
>
Not sure what a "network" would do, but it would be very nice to have a
few more where people can register and test. If set up appropriately,
two-proxy setups should be easy to run. Since a SIP network cannot run
on proxies alone, we need some auto-answer SIP agents that would allow
to test forking-related scenarios.
> If anyone is really keen to test against us further I am happy to make our
> Proxy accessible from a temporary location while I work at finding it a
> permanent home. Particularly if you have a proxy and would like to try some of
> the more adventurous scenarios mixing in Record-Route, Max-Forwards, Via hiding
> etc
Hopefull, this implementors list will get people together along the
lines you mention.
>
> Cheers,
> Neil
> --
> Ubiquity Software Corporation http://www.ubiquity.net
