Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5







Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

0067-2006-02_AKTK_Interconnect_and_ENUM_RStastny_v1.ppt 0067-2006-02_AKTK_Interconnect_and_ENUM_RStastny_v1.ppt Presentation Transcript

  • IP Interconnect and Infrastucture ENUM and the relevance on NGNs AK-TK ENUM Wien, 16. Feber 2006 Richard Stastny, ÖFEG* * The opinions expressed here may or may not be that of my company
  • Content
    • NGN/IP Interconnect – VoIP Peering
      • Some definitions
    • What is ENUM?
    • What kind of ENUM?
      • Infrastructure ENUM
    • Recent IETF developments
      • ENUM WG
    • Benefits in a nutshell
  • Definitions
    • What are NGNs?
      • IP-based “networks”
      • “ Service provider” “networks” offering real-time or near realtime IP communications
      • “ Enterprise networks”
      • etc.
      •  Administrative Domains
    • What is Interconnection between NGNs?
      • a user registered in one administrative domain is able to contact (establish a session to) an user registered in a different administrative domain by using a Public User Identity (Address-of-Record, E.164 Number)
      • preferably via IP
  • NGN/IP Interconnect (VoIP Peering)
    • If we take the All-IP paradigm seriously, we have two basic requirements :
      • Any real-time communication originating on IP and terminating on IP MUST stay on IP end-to-end
      • This implies, it MUST NOT use the PSTN/ISDN to interconnect.
    • Benefits are:
      • improved end-to-end functionality (BB codecs, IM, video, conferencing, presence, …)
      • Improved end-to-end QoS
      • No additional cost beside of IP-access
      • convergence possible at the end-user’s device
  • Example IMS (TS 23.228)
    • Public User Identities
      • something one may put on a business card  a SIP URI or a TEL URI (in E.164 format)
    • Routing* within IMS shall use SIP URIs
      • (converted via DNS to IP addresses – RFC3263)
      • TEL URIs will require conversion to SIP URIs (via ENUM)  Interconnection between IMS must be possible by using SIP URIs only
    • * Routing = finding the next hop
  • Possible Public User Identities
    • E.164 numbers
    • SIP URIs defined by provider:
      • sip:4319793321@telekom.at
      • sip:richard.stastny@aon.at
    • SIP URIs with self-provided domains:
      • sip:8431@kapsch.net
      • sip:richard.stastny@oefeg.at
    • Electronic or E.164 NUMber mapping is defined by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in RFC3761 as:
    • the mapping of „Telephone Numbers“ to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) using the Domain Name System (DNS) in the domain e164.arpa
      • URIs are used to identify resources on the Internet (e.g. http:// enum.nic.at )
    • The purpose of ENUM is to enable the convergence between the PSTN and the Internet
    ENUM is defined by the IETF
  • ENUM in a nutshell
    • take an E.164 phone number
    +43 720 203 211
    • turn it into a FQDN
    • returns list of URIs
    • query the DNS (for NAPTR)
    mailto:richard.stastny@oefeg.at sms tel:+436644204100 IN NAPTR 100 100 "u" “E2U+sip“ !^.*$!SIP:richard@iphone.at! .
  • ENUM Implementations
    • 30 Greece
    • 31 Netherlands
    • 33 France Trial
    • 350 Gibraltar
    • 353 Ireland Trial
    • 354 Iceland
    • 358 Finland Trial
    • 36 Hungary
    • 374 Armenia
    • 386 Slovenia requested
    • 39 Italy
    • 40 Romania
    • 41 Switzerland
    • 420 Czech Republic Trial?
    • 421 Slovakia Trial?
    • 423 Liechtenstein Trial
    • 43 Austria
    • 44 UK Trial
    • 46 Sweden Trial
    • 47 Norway
    • 48 Poland
    • 49 Germany
    • 246 Diego Garcia
    • 247 Ascension
    • 290 Saint Helena
    • 55 Brazil
    • 61 Australia Trial
    • 63 Philippines ?
    • 66 Thailand
    • 65 Singapore Trial
    • 81 Japan Trial
    • 82 Korea Trial
    • 86 China Trial
    • 88234 Global Networks ?
    • 87810 VISIONng UPT
    • 971 UAE
    http://www.ripe.net/enum/request-archives/ http://www.centr.org/kim/enum/index.html Delegations in e164.arpa as of February 15th, 2006
    • 1 North America (US, CA, Jamaika)
    • additional Asian countries (Taiwan…) have trials, but not in .arpa
  • The basic idea of ENUM (RFC3671)
    • The basic idea of ENUM was
      • to allow end-users
      • to opt-in with their EXISTING phone-numbers on the PSTN
      • into e164.arpa
      • to provide OTHER end-users with the capability
      • to look up contact URIs on the Internet the above end-user wants to link to this number
    • This kind of ENUM is called User ENUM
  • SIP Session establishment sip:alice@providerA.net SIP server SIP server sip:eve@providerA.net sip:eve@providerB.net sip:bob@providerB.net sip:bob@providerB.net session DNS SRV lookup providerB.net sip:bob@providerB.net IP –based network If this does not work, forget ENUM DNS providerA.net providerB.net
  • Other IP Networks IP Transport (Access and Core) T - MGF I - BGF UPSF P - CSCF I/S - CSCF BGCF SLF Charging Functions IWF PSTN Emulation (R2) Mw Mw/Mk/Mm Mr Mg Mj Mi Mp Mn Gm Gq ' ISC Cx Dx Dh Sh Ic Rf /Ro Rf /Ro Ib Iw Gq ' PSTN/ISDN SGF MRFC MGCF MRFP e4 Ie Mw IBCF Mk Mk Application Servers Rf /Ro AGCF e2 P1 P2 P3 UE CNG MG IMS / PSTN Simulation Gq ' - SPDF A-RACF Resource & Admission Control Resource & Admission Control SPDF Network Attachment Subsystem Re Ia RCEF BGF Ut Ut Overall ETSI TISPAN IMS Architecture – all subsystems
  • ITU-T NGN System Architecture
  • IMS ?
  • E.164 Session establishment sip:alice@providerA.net SIP server SIP server sip:eve@providerA.net sip:eve@providerB.net sip:bob@providerB.net tel:+43780420410 session DNS SRV lookup providerB.net sip:bob@providerB.net DNS IN NAPTR ? ... NAPTR ... "!^.*$!sip:bob@providerB.net!" What is ENUM adding? providerA.net providerB.net ENUM DNS
  • What are the Benefits of ENUM?
    • ENUM is using the DNS
      • it’s there, it works, it’s global, it scales, it’s reliable, it’s open, anyone can use it…
      • saving CAPEX
    • Enables the originating administrative domain to do an All Call Query (ACQ) to find the destination network
      • Ultimate solution in Number Portability
    • Provisioning is done only by the destination (recipient) administrative domain for the E.164 numbers this domain is hosting
      • Saving OPEX
    • Enables all multimedia (MM) services for E.164 numbers for all sessions on IP end-to-end
      • Enables convergence (whatever that means)
  • So what ENUM should be used? The ENUM Babuschka‘s
  • The “ENUMs”
    • User ENUM
    • Private ENUM
    • Operator ENUM
    • Enterprise ENUM
    • Federation ENUM
    • Carrier ENUM
    • Infrastructure ENUM
    • EMINEM
  • User ENUM
    • User ENUM requires
      • country opt-in
      • end-user opt-in
    • “ Service providers” have no say in User ENUM
    • So Service Providers using IP-based technology need other solutions to be able to Interconnect
      • via IP-based technology and
      • using E.164 Numbers
  • Private ENUM
    • Also called:
      • Operator ENUM
      • Enterprise ENUM
    • An administrative domain is setting up their own private ENUM DNS
      • May be used in addition to other solutions to route within own network
    • But does not solve the Interconnect problem with other administrative domains AND
      • requires extensive provisioning
  • Federation ENUM
    • This is currently how “service providers” interconnect on IP:
    • Variants:
      • Private ENUM in a “walled garden” extranet (GSMA)
      • SIP Exchange with restricted access on the Internet (Cable providers, XConnect, SIP-IX, …)
      • public tree not in „e164.arpa“ (e164.info)
    • Advantages:
      • No user opt-in, NO REGULATORS INVOLVED , intrinsic peering agreements, savings in CAPEX, OPEX, MM-services
    • Disadvantages:
      • limited reach,
      • no global solution,
      • how to peer with other federations?
  • The Future as seen by GSMA
  • Carrier DNS Architectures IPX B Slave Root Server (Tier 0) Country Y Country Z Fixed Operator Central Authority Mobile Operator Fixed Operator Central Authority Country X Mobile Operator Shows possible examples of the DNS hierarchy which will vary by country Master Root Server (Tier 0) The carrier data is normally stored in a database and the DNS datafill generated when the DNS is updated IPX A Slave Root Server (Tier 0) Master Root Database IPX C Slave Root Server (Tier 0) Mobile Operator Mobile Operator DNS Server (Tier 1 and Tier 2) DNS (Tier 2) DNS (Tier 2) DNS Server (Tier 1) Master DNS Database Master DNS Database DNS Server (Tier 1 and Tier 2) Master DNS DB (Tier 2) Master DNS DB (Tier 2) Master DNS Database
  • IPI (IP Inter-working) g oal s
    • Create environment to grow IP services
    • Ensure customer centric sustainable model
    • Introduce a fair distribution of value
    • Foster continuous market growth
    • Establish alternatives to access- only based inter-working
    • Ensure several models available in the market
  • Some Companies I nvolved SIP trial project Total approx 50 companies actively involved in trials Additional IPI project supporters
  • SIP Forum - IP PBX/SP Interop
  • Public Infrastructure ENUM
    • If Infrastructure ENUM is intended to allow the mapping of any E.164 number
      • that can be reached via IP
      • even if it terminates on the PSTN
      • to a SIP URI,
    • Infrastructure ENUM must be in the public DNS.
    • But this is useless, if the resulting SIP URI cannot be reached
    • So for Infrastructure ENUM also a global IP Interconnect (VoIP Peering) regime is required.
    • ENUM is an applet to VoIP Peering
  • Standardisation in IETF
    • Two recent major developments in IETF regarding (VoIP) Interconnect:
      • ENUM WG extended scope to include Infrastructure ENUM
      • Voipeer BoFs to create new SPEERMINT WG
    • Session PEERing for Multimedia INTerconnect
      • WG established 8. Feber 2006
  • Separation of Scope
    • The ENUM WG is primarily concerned with the acquisition of Call Routing Data (CRD) e.g. a SIP URI,
    • while the SPEERMINT WG is focused on the use of such CRD.
    • Importantly, the CRD can be derived from ENUM (i.e., an E.164 DNS entry), or via any other mechanism available to the user.
  • Scope ENUM and SPEERMINT Infrastructure ENUM Policy Database ENUM Lookup Policy Lookup I-ENUM SPEERMINT Number SIP URI Routing Parameter
  • Current I-Ds in ENUM WG
    • Carrier/Infrastrucure ENUM Requirements
      • draft-lind-infrastructure-enum-reqs-01
    • Combined User and Carrier ENUM in the e164.arpa tree
      • draft-haberler-carrier-enum-01
    • IANA Registration for an Enumservice Containing PSTN Signaling Information
      • draft-ietf-enum-pstn-02
  • Current I-Ds in SPEERMINT
    • Terminology for Describing VoIP Peering and Interconnect
      • draft-meyer-voipeer-terminology-01
    • Publishing SIP Peering Policy
      • draft-lendl-sip-peering-policy-00
      • This documents proposes the use of DNS entries to publish a SIP proxy's policy for accepting incoming calls. Such published policies can be used to selectively establish peering relationships between VoIP service providers.
  • Benefits in a nutshell
    • The major benefits of Infrastructure ENUM and SPEERMINT for (VoIP) carriers and (VoIP) service providers is to save costs:
    • Minimal CAPEX for setting up the required infrastructure to provide the routing data
    • Minimal OPEX for maintaining routing data:
      • Announce the E.164 numbers you host (in ENUM)
      • Announce the domains you host (in DNS)
      • (make bilateral or multilateral peering agreements)
      • Query ENUM and DNS to find any other destination provider
  • Next Activities
      • WI 4006 on Interconnect
      • WI 4009 to update TS 102 172 for Infrastructure ENUM
      • Joint Meeting with GSMA (March 1st, London)
    • IETF#65 in Dallas, March 2006
    • NP Conference, London, March 2006
    • ENUM Summit, IQPC, Boston, April 2006
    • ITU-T SG2, Geneva, May 2006
    • Infrastructure ENUM and IP Interconnect, Marcus Evans, London, June 2006,
  • The End
    • Thank you
    Richard Stastny ÖFEG +43 664 420 4100 [email_address] http://voipandenum.blogspot.com