I empathize with you, Bill. It's a common question. It's a good
question. There's no
quick answer. One could say the B2BUA is a concatenation of two user
agents and thus can do whatever it feels like, but I suspect you
already knew that and that answer won't really help you. My advice is
thus:

1. As I said, it's a common question, so review past discussions of the topic.
Google is your friend here: I recommend various incantations of
"proxy," "B2BUA",
"differences," "call stateful proxy," "transparent B2BUA" and maybe
filter it with
a "sip-implementors" or "sipping"

2. Don't expect definitive answers. Simply put, there aren't any.
There do seem to be
lots of opinions, however. Study the protocol long enough and you'll
begin to form opinions of your own.

3. One opinion that stuck in my mind was a message Dean Willis posted
to the SIPPING list a while back. If I were to paraphrase, he argues
that maybe the important thing isn't to classify a node as being a
"stateful proxy," "call stateful proxy," "B2BUA," or "transparent
B2BUA," but rather to understand that there's great flexibility in
what headers and fields a node will manipulate as it forwards a SIP
message on. Nodes that manipulate less of the message are more
"transparent" than others. And so there's really a sort of continuum
of transparency.

Here's a link to his post:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg01855.html
For the record, the message was titled "Transparency Top 10 List" and
was dated May 14, 2002.

I'm sorry for the "meta" answer to your question. I do hope that it's
helpful on some level.

-- 
Gary Cote
www.awardsolutions.com
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to