skip to main content
article

Ubiquitous device personalization and use: The next generation of IP multimedia communications

Published:01 May 2007Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Service usage in emerging ubiquitous environments includes seamless and personalized usage of public and private devices discovered in the vicinity of a user. In our work, we describe an architecture for device discovery, device configuration, and the transfer of active sessions between devices. The presented architecture uses the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as a standardized, widely used signaling protocol for IP-based multimedia services. Our solution includes support of simple existing devices, split of sessions between devices, user-control of location-based behavior, and handling of security and privacy concerns. We present the implementation and show the feasibility of our work with analytical evaluation and measurements.

References

  1. Andreasen, F., Baugher, M., and Wing, D. 2006. Session description protocol security descriptions for media streams. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 4568 (July).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and Norrman, K. 2004. The secure real-time transport protocol (SRTP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3711 (Mar.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Berger, S., Schulzrinne, H., Sidiroglou, S., and Wu, X. 2003. Ubiquitous computing using SIP. In Proceedings of ACM 13th International Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video (NOSSDAV 2003) (June). Monterey, CA., ACM Press, New York, NY, 82--89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and Masinter, L. 1998. Uniform resource identifiers (URI): Generic syntax. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 2396. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bluetooth Core Specification v2.0, http://www.bluetooth.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Camarillo, G., Burger, E., Schulzrinne, H., and Van Wijk, A. 2005. Transcoding services invocation in the session inititation protocol (SIP) using third party call control (3pcc). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 4117 (June).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Capkun, S., Hubaux, J. P., and Buttyan, L. 2003. Mobility helps security in ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MobiHOC 2003), Annapolis, Md. (June). ACM Press, New York, NY, 46--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Columbia. http://www.cs.columbia.edu/irt/cinemaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Dallas Semiconductor. ibutton. http://www.ibutton.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Dierks, T. and Allen, C. 1999. The TLS protocol, version 1.0, IETF RFC 2246, (Jan.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. European Telecommunications Standard Institute. http://www.etsi.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Handley, M. and Jacobson, V. 1998. SDP: Session description protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 2327 (Apr.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Hasegawa, M., Morikawa, H., Inoue, M., Bandara, U., Murakami, H., and Mahmud, K. 2003. Cross-device handover using the service mobility proxy. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications (WPMC 2003). Yokosuka, Japan (Oct.) 357--361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Johnston, A., Sparks, R., Cunningham, C., Donovan, S., and Summers, K. 2007. Session initiation protocol (SIP) service examples. Internet Engineering Task Force Internet Draft. (Jan.). (Work in Progress).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaneko, K., Morikawa, H., and Aoyama, T. 2003. Session layer mobility support for 3C everywhere environment. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications (WPMC 2003). Yokosuka, Japan (Oct.), 347--351.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Kempf, J. and Goldschmidt, J. 2001. Notification and subscription for SLP. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3082 (Mar.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kikuta, Y., et al. 2003. Design of seamless service environment for adaptive service transfer among terminals. In Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Mobile Multimedia Communications (MoMuc2003). Munich, Germany (Oct.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kutscher, D. and Ott, J. 2003. Dynamic device access for mobile users. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conferences on Personal Wireless Communications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahy, R., Biggs, B., and Dean, R. 2004. The session initiation protocol (SIP) ‘Replaces’ header. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3891 (Sep.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Niemi, A. 2004. Session initiation protocol (SIP) extension for event state publication. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3903 (Oct.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. OpenGIS. 2003. Open geography markup language (GML) implementation specification. OGC 02-023rf, (Jan.) http://www.opengeospatial.org/specs/?page=specsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Ott, J., Kutscher, D., and Meyer, D. 2002. An Mbus profile for call control. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Feb.). (Work in Progress)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ott, J., Perkins, C., and Kutscher, D. 2002. A message bus for local coordination. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3259 (Apr.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Ott, J., Sullivan, G., Wenger, S., and Even, R. 2004. RTP payload format for the 1998 version of ITU-T Rec. H.263 video (H.263+). Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft (Dec.) (Work in Progress)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Peterson, J. 2005. A presence-based GEOPRIV location object format. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 4119, (Dec.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Petrie, D. and Channabasappa, S. 2007. A framework for SIP user agent profile delivery. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft (Mar.). (Work in Progress)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Roach, A. B. 2002. Session initiation protocol (SIP)-specific event notification. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3265 (June). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Rosenberg, J. and Schulzrinne, H. 2002. An offer/answer model with the session description protocol (SDP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3264 (June). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and Schooler, E. 2002. SIP: Session initiation protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3261, (June). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenberg, J., Peterson, J., Schulzrinne, H., and Camarillo, G. 2004. Best current practices for third party call control (3pcc) in the session initiation protocol (SIP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3725 (Apr). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosenberg, J. 2004. A presence event package for the session initiation protocol (SIP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3856 (Aug.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and Kyzivat, P. 2004. Caller preferences for the session initiation protocol (SIP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3841 (Aug.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and Kyzivat, P. 2004. Indicating user agent capabilities in the session initiation protocol (SIP). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3840 (Aug.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Rosenberg, J. 2006. The extensible markup language (XML) configuration access protocol (XCAP). Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Oct.). (Work in Progress)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosenberg, J. 2007a. Presence authorization rules. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Feb.). (Work in Progress).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Rosenberg, J. 2007b. An extensible markup language (XML) document format for indicating a change in XML configuration access protocol (XCAP) resources. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Mar.). (Work in Progress).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Schulzrinne, H. and Wedlund, E. 2000. Application-layer mobility using SIP. ACM Mobile Comput. Commun. Rev. 4, 3 (July). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar, J., and Polk, J. 2006. A document format for expressing privacy preferences for location information. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Feb.). (Work in Progress)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Shacham, R., Schulzrinne, H., Kellerer, W., and Thakolsri, S. 2004. An architecture for location-based service mobility using the SIP event model. ACM Mobisys '04 Workshop on Context Awareness. Boston, MA. (June).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Shacham, R., Schulzrinne, H., Thakolsri, S., and Kellerer, W. 2005. The virtual device: Expanding wireless communication services through service discovery and session mobility. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob 2005). Montreal, Canada (Aug.). 73--81.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Shacham, R., Schulzrinne, H., Kellerer, W., and Thakolsri, S. 2006a. Use of the SIP preconditions framework for media privacy. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (June). (Work in Progress).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Shacham, R., Schulzrinne, H., Thakolsri, S., and Kellerer, W. 2006b. Session initiation protocol (SIP) session mobility. Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet Draft, (Nov.). (Work in Progress).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Song, H., Chu, H.-H., and Kurakake, S. 2002. Browser session preservation and migration. 11th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2002). Hawaii (May).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Sparks, R. 2003. The session initiation protocol (SIP) refer method. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3515 (Apr.). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Sparks, R. 2004. The session initiation protocol (SIP) referred-by mechanism. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3892 (Sep).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Sugano, H., Fujimoto, S., Klyne, G., Bateman, A., Carr, W., and Peterson, J. 2004. Presence information data format (PIDF). Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3863 (Aug.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Sun Microsystems. http://www.sun.com/software/jini/specs. Jini Specifications v1.2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Sync ML. http://www.openmobilealliance.org/syncml/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. UPnP Forum. http://www.upnp.org. Universal plug and play specification 1.0.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Veizades, J., Guttman, E., Perkins, C., and Kaplan, S. 1997. Service location protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 2165 (June). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Wu, X. and Schulzrinne, H. 2003. Programmable end system services using SIP. In Proceedings of International Conference on Communications (ICC ‘03). Anchorage, AK. (May). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 789--793.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Wu, X. and Schulzrinne, H. 2004. SIPc, a multi-function SIP user agent. In Proceedings of 7th IFIP/IEEE International Conference, Management of Multimedia Networks and Services (MMNS '04). San Diego, CA, (Oct.). Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin/Heidelberg, 269--281.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu, X., Schulzrinne, H. 2005. Location-based services in internet telephony. In Proceedings of IEEE Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC '05). Las Vegas, NV. (Jan.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Ubiquitous device personalization and use: The next generation of IP multimedia communications

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!