[Asterisk-Dev] We can do better than Skype

[Whisker, Peter]

Agreed!

Given that Microsoft Messenger has switched to SIP, and Yahoo Messanger in
the guise of British Telecom is also SIP based, the days of proprietary
standards must be few. I agree that rather than supporting Skype we should
be persuading them to use SIP (or even IAX!). Skype users should be lobbying
to get support for SIP (at least) or voting with their feet.

Industry reports (eg
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reportinfo.asp?report_id=1359&cat_id=112)
below show both the importance of the open standards and the perceived
effect of major adopters on their further development. 
"With Microsoft's release of Messenger for Windows XP, the software giant
has shed its H.323 skin and revealed newfound support for SIP in its
Messenger suite. That means SIP is going mainstream - in Windows XP and
Windows 2000."

I hope that IAX is also taken up by many because it does not do you head in
trying to overcome firewalls.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists
[mailto:benjk.on.asterisk.ml at gmail.com]
Sent: 19 October 2004 14:28
To: Asterisk Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] We can do better than Skype


On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:42:52 +0100, Daniel Pocock
<daniel at readytechnology.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> The real issue is not making Asterisk compatible with Skype (their days
> are numbered anyhow, as well as competing with open technologies, they
> also have to compete with all the other proprietaries like MSN messager)

agreed.

> - the issue is, can we make a similar 'plug and play' telephony protocol
> that is an open standard, build the appropriate channel driver for
> Asterisk,

the answer would seem to be "absolutely yes" as I consider IAX to fit
this description.

> and also make a channel implementation available for products
> like Gnomemeeting so that end users can connect?

Gnomemeeting is open source, so all it takes is somebody with the
right skillset to make an effort to link it to iaxlib and then teach
it how to use that library in order to talk IAX.

> I believe IAX is much closer to achieving this goal than SIP or H323,

most definitely yes.

> but Skype's protocol is more successful at getting through firewalls and
> NAT

How is that? Do you mean to say there are presumably many more Skype
sessions than IAX sessions, hence they are more successful?

Otherwise, how is IAX not successful in traversing NAT?

> Maybe we need to look at the possibility of IAX over HTTP

You'd have to write a wrapper protocol because HTTP is text based and
IAX is binary. This would probably lead to inefficiencies. Efficiency
is one of the main strengths of IAX.

IAX over TCP?

Real-time is not typically a good thing to run over TCP. Call quality
will probably drop.

> In other words, why go to them, when we can wait for them to come to us?

precisely ;-)

rgds
benjk

-- 
Sunrise Telephone Systems, 9F Shibuya Daikyo Bldg., 1-13-5 Shibuya,
Tokyo, Japan.

NB: Spam filters in place. Messages unrelated to the * mailing lists
may get trashed.
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Dev mailing list
Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.