Re: [Serusers] Re: [Users] TM : retransmission timers

[everything else above snipped -- I just got intrigued by this] At 12:19 30/11/2006, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote: I think this is really the point. I haven't commented on the fork before but I argue that if folks want to have advantage of that (and to be clear I don't dispute openser advantages, among others documentation is marvellous), there should be damage control in place to compensate the disadvantages. Presumably because many folks perceive this (not without a reason) as a contraversial topic, I have received quite some feedback in privacy and it is too what I personally think: split development does split results. openser folks may correct me if I'm wrong, but openser has not undergone an overhaul like we did (timers, DNS, STUN, DB, etc etc) with ottendorf which means some parts do not appear to be state-of-the-art. Again: I'm sure that openser folks working hard may be upset about this statement, but in the end it is not meant to devalue anyone's work -- I'm saying the maths is easy -- some folks were focusing on DNS and made it better, some on XMPP and made XMPP better. I better don't speak for Andrei to avoid any possible misinterpretations, but I think the alternaves he has offered are very reasonable. Labor division, coordination of fixes, friendly progress-stimulating competition, all of that are things which can make results better. I'm just curious what the openser-oriented answers will be. I mean no answer is in a sense answer too, but I'm still wondering if I could get something more explicit. We will definitely be contributing to the synergies in some or other ways. -jiri -- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/