[SIPForum-discussion] SIP to ISUP mapping

[Stephen James]

We have created interworking profiles allowing the customer to configure based on their customers needs. Q.1912.5 has some issues with early media and SIP w/o embedded ISUP as it does not proscribe sending 183 with SDP on certain situations. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 7, 2012, at 13:15, Raghul Prasanna <raghul82 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> So folks, what is it then, choose the best that suites you is it?
> 
> From: "Calme, James A (Jim)" <jim.calme at alcatel-lucent.com>
> To: Raghul Prasanna <raghul82 at yahoo.co.uk> 
> Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2012, 14:13
> Subject: RE: [SIPForum-discussion] SIP to ISUP mapping
> 
> Welcome to my nightmare!
>  
> From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Raghul Prasanna
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 6:53 PM
> To: discussion at sipforum.org
> Subject: [SIPForum-discussion] SIP to ISUP mapping
>  
> Hello,
>  
> I was looking at standards for SIP to ISUP and ISUP to SIP mapping and found the following
>  
> * RFC 3398 (IETF)
> * RFC 3372 (SIP T) IETF
> * Q 1912.5 (which talks about SIP profile A, B and C (SIP I)) ITU.
>  
> SIP I and SIP T defines the std for ISUP encapsulation and translation.
>  
> The rest I believe says mainly about ISUP -> SIP and SIP -> ISUP mapping.
>  
> RFC 3398 introduces the concept of SIP bridging two PSTN networks and says  gateways bordering PSTN SIP network can encapsulate ISUP message etc.
>  
> In ISUP to SIP network, we can encapsulate the ISUP message, but on a SIP to ISUP network we have to map the SIP messages (fields) to ISUP messages (fields). In order to do this which std will a gateway follow?
>  
>  
> Why do we have so many standards? Did some of them get superseded, which I believe can be because 3398 was formulated in 2002 while 1912.5 in 2004. Is that correct?
>  
> If all are in use, who follows which standard or does it depend on vendor?  Until now I believed Q1912.5 was the bible for SIP <-> ISUP mapping and gateways can apply either SIP I or do standard mapping depending on requirements, which I believe is not correct.
>  
> To be honest I am lost a bit after going through the above standards.
>  
> Can someone shed some light please?
>  
> Thanks,
> Raghul
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20120607/54b0312b/attachment-0002.html>