[SR-Users] [OT] Fwd: [dispatch] proposed SIXPAC charter

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 10/21/10 6:16 PM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
>
>> This is sorted out by location server. iirc, you implemented the
>> filtering based on allowed methods.
> yes, that takes care of sending subscribe to ua that does not support
> it.  the sad thing is that there are UAs on the marker that don't
> advertise their supported methods in register request.


Fortunately is more present than xcap support and even better, easier to 
implement.

>> Going beyond the above consideration where a solution already exists and
>> it is in place for many years, my concern was how long pay-per-volume
>> will last thinking of current smart phone market pressure that worth to
>> make a complex design costing fortunes to implement (e.g., IMS) and how
>> much will turn in profit for a narrow niche.
> just today i heard in radio news that some operators who currently have
> flat rate data service are planning to go for metered one.  they claim
> that with current flat rates, it is not possible to keep on upgrading
> mobile network capacity.  i don't think that vodafone, for example, is
> offering flat rate data service anywhere in the world.  i hope that i'm
> wrong, but i would not at this stage count on flat rate mobile data.
> and it is not just the cost, i simply don't want to get SIP spammed by
> unauthorized sources.

This is true (ie, some mobile operators limiting the flat rate), but the 
main reason is voice/video communication over 3g, bypassing their voice 
services, whatever they say publicly.

Regarding the spam, I guess it would be more annoying to get calls from 
unauthorized sources, so should be no difference between authorizing 
voice, im, presence or something else via sip.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com