comments inline....

2012/3/18 Nikos Tzanis <[email protected]>

> On 17/3/2012 8:00 μμ, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> > Nikos,
> >
> > Following on to what has been said...
> >
> > Typically one would not set out to solve a problem in hardware unless
> > there has been a demonstrated problem solving it in software. And, as
> > Brandon says, you can't realistically expect to do the *whole* job in
> > hw, so you will need something that can host the software part. So
> > really you are talking about building a hw accelerator for a sw
> > implementation.
> >
> > So, I would recommend looking around for a suitable sw implementation,
> > and then study what could be accelerated. This probably makes no sense
> > at all in a single user endpoint. There *might* be something to gain in
> > a server, such as an SBC.
> >
> >       Good luck,
> >       Paul
> >
> > On 3/17/12 12:31 PM, Brandon W. Yuille wrote:
> >> The biggest problem I foresee is that you're trying to do something in
> >> hardware which is normally done in software. With Nataraju's list I
> >> would say the only point you can realistically accomplish in hardware
> >> would be point 1. He also forgot to mention you'll need to handle
> >> potentially the Ethernet MAC layer (must be hardware), IP/ARP, and UDP
> >> transport which all could be done in hardware. With everything else
> >> you're probably going to need to implement a soft core or use an
> >> external cpu. Without one, you'd be attempting a monolithic problem that
> >> most likely couldn't be built in under a year. So if you end up using a
> >> cpu you may as well do all the protocol layers in software along with
> >> the parsing to make your task easy.
> >>
> >> Good luck,
> >> Brandon
> >>
> >> On 03/17/2012 08:51 AM, Nataraju A.B wrote:
> >>> Tzanis,
> >>>
> >>> Simplest proposition would be to use the bottom-up approach.
> >>>
> >>> start with
> >>>        1. Parser (encode/decoder) module
> >>>        2. Transaction module (initially you design this module one for
> UA
> >>> only, exclude proxy specific
> >>>             processing to start with - for simplicity only)
> >>>        3. Dialog module
> >>>        4. Session module
> >>>        5. Some application on top of SIP.
> >>>
> >>> One more suggestion would be to go through the OSIP / asterisk /
> others...
> >>> First you understand the basics, then you can proceed with VHDL based
> >>> implementation...
> >>>
> >>> hope this helps...
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Nataraju A B
> >>>
> >>> 2012/3/17 νικος τζανης<[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Hello , I am a student and i was asked to implement sip in fpga . I
> have
> >>>> studied the rfc 3261 but i dont know where to start from .Sip is a
> >>>> transaction based protocol . Do you have any idea on how to do this
> thing?
> >>>> I have found system offload engine (SOE) implementations but i want to
> >>>> implement the whole transition model in vhld . Any help would be
> >>>> appreciated .
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Nikos Tzanis
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Sip-implementors mailing list
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sip-implementors mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> First of all thank you for the quick replies .I want you to know that I
> m not trying to implement a commercial porduct but to go as far as i can
> for educational reasons. So a simple model with them main features of
> SIP would be ok . The first module(parser) is almost ready .When a
> message arrive , i can find all the header-header value pairs and save
> it in memory . Where a cpu could easilly find them . Surely a cpu is
> needed , but if i could create standard messages too(with the minimum
> fields required. To,From,Cseq,Call-id,Max Forward,Via . ) . I mean if
> hardware could find these stored values and send the message ? But how
> to go from the simple transaction model to vhld???where can i find the
> techniques?
>

[ABN] if the parser is already being implemented in vhdl, next step i
suggest you to try out is to integrate with the transaction and upper layer
functions implemented in C/C++ code (probably you can take it from osip
stack).

This combination shall perform better (w.r.t processing time) than
implementing complete OSIP stack written in C/C++ language.

A different opinion/question altogether, if it is for educational purposes,
is there a particular requirement to use vhdl ???? if not experimenting
with complete osip stack is a better option.

The only advantage i see in your scenario is faster message processing. if
you think of maintainability try  out anything with complete OSIP stack,
that would provide you a better insight into SIP stack functionality.


>     thanks a lot once more
> Nikos Tzanis
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>



-- 
Thanks,
Nataraju A.B.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to