P2PSIP Use Case Attributes
Information collected by Spencer Dawkins, Ed.
(from draft-bryan-sipping-p2p-usecases-00)
| Use Case |
Number of Users * |
Distribution of Nodes |
Pure P2P? |
Centralized Operations/ Management |
Authenticated Users |
Carrier-Class Robustness |
Interaction with CS-SIP |
DNS available |
| Public P2P VoIP
Service Providers |
millions |
intra-domain |
hybrid |
yes |
yes |
yes |
yes |
yes |
| Open Global P2P VoIP Network | millions |
inter-domain |
bybrid | no |
no |
yes |
yes |
yes |
| Presence Using Multimedia Consumer Electronics Devices | tens |
intra-domain |
P2P |
no |
no |
no |
no |
yes |
| Impeded Access | hundreds |
inter-domain | P2P |
no |
no |
no |
no |
yes |
| Anonymous Communications | tens |
inter-domain |
P2P |
no |
no |
no |
no |
no |
| Security Conscious Small Organizations | hundreds |
intra-domain |
P2P |
maybe |
yes |
yes |
no |
yes |
| Ad-Hoc and Ephemeral Groups | tens |
intra-domain | P2P |
no |
no |
no |
no |
no |
| Emergency First Responder Networks | thousands |
intra-domain | P2P |
no |
self-cert? |
no |
when available |
no |
| Extending the Reach of Mobile Devices | hundreds |
intra-domain | P2P |
no |
no |
no |
no |
no |
| Deployments in the Developing World | tens |
inter-domain | P2P |
no |
no |
no |
when available |
no |
| Serverless or Small Scale IP-PBX | tens |
intra-domain | P2P |
maybe |
self-cert? |
no |
yes |
yes |
| P2P for Redundant SIP Proxies | tens |
intra-domain | P2P |
yes |
yes |
yes |
no |
yes |
| Failover for Centralized Systems | tens |
intra-domain | P2P |
yes |
yes |
yes |
yes |
yes |
* "Number of Users"
may not be "number of peers" in hybrid-P2P overlays.
Notes:
- We expect the Use Cases draft to be revised in the near future (00 has expired).
- We expect "Presence Using Multimedia Consumer Electronics Devices" to split into a PAN-scale overlay case and a WAN-scale overlay case. This table will be adjusted when the description is available.
- "Authenticated Users"
and "Carrier-Grade Robustness" are conflated in the current draft, and
may be discussed separately in the revised draft.
- "Distribution of Nodes" in this table is probably conflating link-layer broadcast and IP-level multicast, but we're ignoring this for now.
- We may also need a
"DHCP" column in this table - whether DHCP for additional dynamic
configuration is available - but we're ignoring this for now.