On 02/10/2009 04:44 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2009/2/10 Johansson Olle E oej@edvina.net:
I have been to XMPP interop, although they focused on Voice/Jingle, I tried the new purple module -- still some things to sort out and I will post a resume about this particular case and entire event.
I spent monday on the XMPP dev meeting a got a few ideas for improvements.
Nooo, forget XMPP!! SIP SIMPLE already has enough cool specifications, the problem is that nobody implements them!
:-) -- maybe SIP extension writers can learn from xmpp where they go first for prototype implementation and then to standardization.
You are right, there are cool specification, but many do not map properly to reality.
Looking for interoperability with XMPP will not help, and I don't want a future in which my softphone implements SIP for voice and XMPP for presence/IM, that's a dirty workaround!
I think a competing open protocol is good all the time, makes things improve in both sides. Apart of that, sip and xmpp does not really match, SIP is more a routing-like protocol, while xmpp is a content-like protocol. XMPP network exist and cannot be ignored.
A good usability of xmpp protocol will be communication between various points of your environment, sip servers, web servers, etc...
Cheers, Daniel
2009/2/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com:
Nooo, forget XMPP!! SIP SIMPLE already has enough cool specifications, the problem is that nobody implements them!
:-) -- maybe SIP extension writers can learn from xmpp where they go first for prototype implementation and then to standardization.
Sure, I agree 100%, but it's what we have now and we must live with it :( (sure you already know my opinion about IETF...)
On 02/10/2009 05:05 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2009/2/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com:
Nooo, forget XMPP!! SIP SIMPLE already has enough cool specifications, the problem is that nobody implements them!
:-) -- maybe SIP extension writers can learn from xmpp where they go first for prototype implementation and then to standardization.
Sure, I agree 100%, but it's what we have now and we must live with it :( (sure you already know my opinion about IETF...)
right :-).
It is important to know that FOSDEM is hacker's meeting. Debates there are very constructive. Particularly, I have learned several good hints about presence. Sunday we discussed a bit how to make kamailio more friendly to implement/deal simple presence extensions.
Here we get into XML content and XMPP folks have broad experience there. It is where I got an idea to an issue pointed by Andreas Granig - content based presence extensions.
Today the SIMPLE presence server implementation is monolithic, everything has to be coded in presence_xml module. Next versions will change a bit this aspect, will offer a better and easier interface to develop extensions for same event and content-type.
Cheers, Daniel
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Iñaki Baz Castillo