AMS or IMS? Peaches or apples?

Last week, Paul Jones explained on VoIP Survivor the basic concepts behind AMS. The name might ring a bell to those familiar with IMS, but there is no real connection (besides the unfortunate use of a similar acronym). While IMS is an ongoing work, AMS is just beginning. There are many people out there engaged today in one way or another with IMS. They come from different companies and participate in various organizations (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  June 5th, 2008  |  Filed under Standardization
2 comments  |  Add your own 


The challenges of testing Unified Communication products (and/or hosting a SuperOp event)

Two weeks ago, RADVISION hosted the IMTC SuperOp! 2008 event. The most obvious conclusion from this event is that multimedia conferencing (or should I say Unified Communications) is getting better – at least in terms of interoperability. Without exceptions, all companies successfully connected video sessions with one another. The IMTC SuperOp! event is the main interoperability event of the IMTC. In this event multiple activity groups, each dealing with a different multimedia communications technology, gather in a single room to (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  May 29th, 2008  |  Filed under Interoperability
Add a comment 


Applications also need interoperability

The IMTC’s SuperOp! event is just across the corner, and this time, I am proud to say that RADVISION will be hosting it (pdf). Companies coming to this event will be testing their products for interoperability. There are parts of the market though, that are ignoring interoperability. From my own experience, they pay dearly for it in due time. Interoperability can be viewed as a process where you hurtle your product against a product of a different vendor and (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  May 1st, 2008  |  Filed under Interoperability
Add a comment 


De-facto standardization hurts 3G ring-back service

There are times when de-facto standards hinder the adoption and use of services. This is the case with 3G-324M and video ring-back servers. What’s 3G-324M? 3G video telephony uses a protocol called 3G-324M. This protocol in turn, uses another protocol called H.245 for call control - with H.245, handsets signal what features and capabilities they have and negotiate the media channels that will be used in the call. H.245 includes procedures and message that allow for the opening and closing (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  April 24th, 2008  |  Filed under Standardization
1 comment  |  Add your own 


Webinar: IMS Security - How to Protect Signaling Communications against Attack

IMS enables the speedy creation and deployment of new services (at least on paper). As such, it has been adopted as the architecture for next generation networks - this is true for mobile, fixed, wireless and cable networks. An important aspect of IMS is security, but I have a feeling that like current VoIP deployments, security is somewhat overlooked. On its lowest level, IMS security requires IPsec - this encrypts and secures the actual IP packets sent over the network. (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  April 3rd, 2008  |  Filed under Technology
Add a comment 


Where do we go from here? 3G-324M and IMS Video Share Technologies

The developers I work with are back from an interoperability event held by the IMTC. They tested there 3G-324M and IMS Video Share technologies to make sure our products are interoperable. What are the insights from these events? 3G-324M Today, 3G-324M is a stable technology available in almost every 3G handset in Europe and Asia. It is stable, interoperable and working - between different handset vendors, against multiple servers, and through roaming services around the world. There are, however, two (read more...)

By Tsahi Levent-Levi  |  January 31st, 2008  |  Filed under Interoperability
Add a comment 



Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS
Subscribe via email:

Join the Survey