Comments on: A-IMS from Verizon and Buddies: A Good thing as I see it http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/ Commentary on Mobile technologies, VoIP, SIP, IMS, Web 2.0 and Technology Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:27:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Arjun http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Arjun Fri, 28 Sep 2007 23:54:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-48 You noticed correctly. However, I have no interest ,gain, nor loss in either mentioning or not mentioning Cisco. Looks like I just missed mentioning their name. Sorry I couldn't offer a more climactic response. I am glad you appreciate Cisco's role in this. You noticed correctly. However, I have no interest ,gain, nor loss in either mentioning or not mentioning Cisco. Looks like I just missed mentioning their name. Sorry I couldn’t offer a more climactic response. I am glad you appreciate Cisco’s role in this.

]]> By: Anonymous http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Anonymous Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:38:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-47 I notice that Cisco notoriously absent from mention in your article as one of the partners developing this solution for VzW, aside from the snide remark about the old Cisco IAD. Since Cisco is first in the "Acknowlegements" section of the A-IMS Architecture doc (June 2006) I can only assume this is intentional.<br/><br/>In reality, Cisco is responsible for implementation of the Bearer Manager portion of the solution that you seem to like so well.<br/><br/>And thank God that Cisco is involved - otherwise A-IMS would wind up with same problems, shortfalls, and oversights as IMS. Because that is what happens when telecom network people try to write a data spec. I notice that Cisco notoriously absent from mention in your article as one of the partners developing this solution for VzW, aside from the snide remark about the old Cisco IAD. Since Cisco is first in the “Acknowlegements” section of the A-IMS Architecture doc (June 2006) I can only assume this is intentional.

In reality, Cisco is responsible for implementation of the Bearer Manager portion of the solution that you seem to like so well.

And thank God that Cisco is involved – otherwise A-IMS would wind up with same problems, shortfalls, and oversights as IMS. Because that is what happens when telecom network people try to write a data spec.

]]> By: Arjun http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-46 Arjun Sat, 24 Feb 2007 05:05:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-46 Unfortunately not. It seems Verizon and partners keep the specs close to their heart, so to speak. Unfortunately not. It seems Verizon and partners keep the specs close to their heart, so to speak.

]]> By: Anonymous http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-45 Anonymous Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:41:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-45 Does Verizon give any details about the policy manager ? Are there any standard docs available in this regard, just curious Does Verizon give any details about the policy manager ? Are there any standard docs available in this regard, just curious

]]> By: Anonymous http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Anonymous Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:39:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-44 Does Verizon give any details about the policy manager ? Are there any standard docs available in this regard, just curious Does Verizon give any details about the policy manager ? Are there any standard docs available in this regard, just curious

]]> By: Anonymous http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Anonymous Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:40:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-43 Interesting indeed. I think it is generous of Verizon to publish their internal implementation spec, and brave of all those vendors to tell us what they are going to do, since that has to be based on implementation plans and gives all the other guys in Standards an advance warning to allow them to take pot shots at it (sorry, thats how standards works). What I find most interesting is that a lot of what A-IMS defines is actually NOT about IMS at all, but about the bits that reside around the edge of IMS. These same functions (policy, authentication, bandwidth management) can be applied to any Service Enabling architecture, including access to the internet for a vertical third party service. <br/><br/>I also find it interesting that A-IMS seems to be a rip off of a lot of stuff that MSF are doing (which Verizon are members of). It's easy to innovate (sic.) when you nicjk someone else's ideas. Interesting indeed. I think it is generous of Verizon to publish their internal implementation spec, and brave of all those vendors to tell us what they are going to do, since that has to be based on implementation plans and gives all the other guys in Standards an advance warning to allow them to take pot shots at it (sorry, thats how standards works). What I find most interesting is that a lot of what A-IMS defines is actually NOT about IMS at all, but about the bits that reside around the edge of IMS. These same functions (policy, authentication, bandwidth management) can be applied to any Service Enabling architecture, including access to the internet for a vertical third party service.

I also find it interesting that A-IMS seems to be a rip off of a lot of stuff that MSF are doing (which Verizon are members of). It’s easy to innovate (sic.) when you nicjk someone else’s ideas.

]]> By: Curro http://blog.roychowdhury.org/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/comment-page-1/#comment-42 Curro Fri, 06 Oct 2006 11:01:00 +0000 http://iconverged.wordpress.com/2006/09/22/a-ims-from-verizon-and-buddies-a-good-thing-as-i-see-it/#comment-42 Hi<br/><br/>Great post and very interesting analysis. I'm afraid that IMS is becoming a chaos, due to all interoperability issues and propietary solutions at the edges. All the vendors want to evolve their own platforms to be 3GPP compliant... with their own products, as you say.<br/><br/>Interesting the multi-level authentication. One of the most challenges when heterogeneous access networks are used is the delay due to new authentication. Also in handovers. Have you found in the document data about latency time or related to this issue?<br/><br/>Thanks! Hi

Great post and very interesting analysis. I’m afraid that IMS is becoming a chaos, due to all interoperability issues and propietary solutions at the edges. All the vendors want to evolve their own platforms to be 3GPP compliant… with their own products, as you say.

Interesting the multi-level authentication. One of the most challenges when heterogeneous access networks are used is the delay due to new authentication. Also in handovers. Have you found in the document data about latency time or related to this issue?

Thanks!

]]>