1. VoIP Meeting Architecture I 05/04/2006 Erik Dobbelsteijn,Jan Ruzicka

2. Roll Call Fabio Vena (SWITCH) Jan Ruzicka (CESNET) Erik Dobbelsteijn (SURFNET) Joao Pereira (FCCN)

3. Meeting Objectives The meeting is meant to inform everyone about their VoIP deployments. We are not aiming at defining an 'ideal architecture'. This will not be doable anyway, because every NRN is in a different stage or situation. IpTel cookbook is good starting point for campus implementation NREN is in different situation What Is the role of NREN?

4. SURFnet SURFnet has an overview of possible scenarios to act as a starting base when discussing architectures. (attachment) SURFnet end-user service: http://www.optibel.nl http://www.optibel.nl SURFnet SIP demoserver: http://sip.showcase.surfnet.nl http://sip.showcase.surfnet.nl SURFnet H.323 service: http://groepscommunicatie.surfnet.nl/info/videoconferencen /home.jsp http://groepscommunicatie.surfnet.nl/info/videoconferencen /home.jsp SURFgroepen service (including MS LCS SIP server): http://www.surfgroepen.nl/ http://www.surfgroepen.nl/ It is hard to integrate all different services into one 'ideal' overall VoIP/VC architecture.

5. CESNET Centralized H.323 VoIP network http://www.ces.net/project/iptelephony/infrastructure.html - rather old version of map http://www.ces.net/project/iptelephony/infrastructure.html PBXs connected to the national GK IP world reached from PBX by special prefix or LCR Trunk GW to carrier stopped because of billing and political reasons. GW moved to one of the institution. Used model CESNET pays to the operator and charges the institution Hungarnet model: operator charges the institution directly SIP introduced into architecture, calling in is quite easy but calling out from institution via SIP is not tested one translating gateway (cisco), problems in deciding the right protocol on GW without translation Institutions should have their own proxies How to encourage to build Sip proxy with limited manpower on instituitions CESNET will provide sip proxy service for some of them at least for some time Goal - Decentralization of the network Role of NREN ? - Shared resources MCU, Authorized peering (Authorized call and limited open call-in), teach the institution,…

6. SWITCH, … Presented centralized architecture - First draft Now moving to decentralization with some centralized services as NAT traversal, peering with operator Providing an end-user service Preparing push to run SIP on institutions Popularity of SIP vs. lack of more good (free) clients. Email- number mapping is more problematic in centralized approach Student accounts – difference between telephone and user. User should have more services than just voip Institutional acounts vs voip provider accounts – additional services specific to organization or educational community. Clients could use more lines, or at least forwarding. Same situation in email services - PT,NL,CZ – students use non institutional email.

7. Issues that NRN's deal with open up VoIP networks? Risks: SPIT and security. Advantages: everyone can call everyone Billing regulatory obligations (lawful intercept, number portability) which role to play: end user/wholesale roles? provide end-users with just another SIP account? ENUM? authentication of users and authorisation of calls. institutions have their own span of control: do not interfere different islands: SIP, H.323 new features (IM/Presence versus regular phones) students will use the easiest service (skype or hotmail!), not necessarily NRN or institutional service