1998Unpublished venueRequires access

A Comparison of SIP and H.323 for Internet Telephony

Henning Schulzrinne, Jonathan Rosenberg

Open publisher page 118 citations

Abstract

Two standards have recently emerged for signaling and control for Internet Telephony. One is ITU Recommendation H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). These two protocols represent very different approaches to the same problem: H.323 embraces the more traditional circuit-switched approach to signaling based on the ISDN Q.931 protocol and earlier H-series recommendations, and SIP favors the more lightweight Internet approach based on HTTP. In this paper, we compare SIP and H.323 on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and features. I. INTRODUCTION In order to provide useful services, Internet telephony requires a set of control protocols for connection establishment, capabilities exchange, and conference control. Currently, two protocols exist to meet this need. One is ITU-T H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). In this paper, we compare the two protocols on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and services. The ITU H.323 ...

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Two standards have recently emerged for signaling and control for Internet Telephony. One is ITU Recommendation H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). These two protocols represent very different approaches to the same problem: H.323 embraces the more traditional circuit-switched approach to signaling based on the ISDN Q.931 protocol and earlier H-series recommendations, and SIP favors the more lightweight Internet approach based on HTTP. In this paper, we compare SIP and H.323 on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and features. I. INTRODUCTION In order to provide useful services, Internet telephony requires a set of control protocols for connection establishment, capabilities exchange, and conference control. Currently, two protocols exist to meet this need. One is ITU-T H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). In this paper, we compare the two protocols on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and services. The ITU H.323 ...

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 118 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Two standards have recently emerged for signaling and control for Internet Telephony. One is ITU Recommendation H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). These two protocols represent very different approaches to the same problem: H.323 embraces the more traditional circuit-switched approach to signaling based on the ISDN Q.931 protocol and earlier H-series recommendations, and SIP favors the more lightweight Internet approach based on HTTP. In this paper, we compare SIP and H.323 on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and features. I. INTRODUCTION In order to provide useful services, Internet telephony requires a set of control protocols for connection establishment, capabilities exchange, and conference control. Currently, two protocols exist to meet this need. One is ITU-T H.323, and the other is the IETF Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). In this paper, we compare the two protocols on complexity, extensibility, scalability, and services. The ITU H.323 ...

Key concepts: Session Initiation Protocol, SIP trunking, Telephony, Computer science, Voice over IP, Signaling protocol, The Internet, Computer network

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Comparison of SIP and H.323 for Internet Telephony — Research Paper | ScholarLens