RFC compliance is not a problem, but still there are SP-specific requirements on how these RFCs are supported and what the SP expects from our side. Also important, what SP is going to send toward us :)
For example, the numbering plan. Calls to UK, for example, should not be 0044.*, but 44.* with phone-context=national. I've got this information via a phone conversation, and not in a written document. Everything works now, I'm just wondering if it's a standard practice to deliver such a poor documentation. >________________________________ >From: Jean-Pierre Schwickerath <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Cc: Stanislav Sinyagin <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 10:52 AM >Subject: Re: [swinog] SIP gateway service documentation > >Hello Stan > >> The SP puts forward a number of requirements, such as >> national/international context in To: field, then some special >> requirements for CallerID privacy, etc. The problem is, we can't get >> a document that describes the technical details of the interface, and >> SP refuses to create such a document. All we've got is a number of >> emails and some information from phone conversations. > >SIP and its extensions are fairly well standardized. Have a look at >http://www.packetizer.com/ipmc/sip/standards.html for an overview of >those RFCs. >We all know the PBX manufacturers and their developers seldom fully >comply to the standards so they should give you a good starting point >on how it's supposed to be done. You will have to test each and every >case with your SP unless he can garantee you he has implemented it >fully standard compliant. > >> Is it a common situation for such a service? Am I too naive with my >> expectations to receive a fully documented service? If it were a >> no-name lousy cheap service provider, I wouldn't ask :) > >We never had any issues when connecting SIP trunks to a provider as >long as they were using RFC compliant SIP (IMHO the RFC compliance is a >major decision point when choosing the SP). And I second you on the >point that the SP should document its extensions to the protocol if >they are not standard compliant extensions. > >Regards > >Jean-Pierre > >-- >HILOTEC Engineering + Consulting AG - Langnau im Emmental >Energietechnik und Datensysteme: Server, PCs, Linux, Telefonanlagen, >VOIP, Hosting, Datenbanken, Entwicklung, Komplettlösungen für KMUs >Tel: +41 34 402 74 00 - http://www.hilotec.com/ > > >
_______________________________________________ swinog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
