[Jingle] Opinions about Coin

Diana Cionoiu diana-liste at null.ro
Tue Apr 19 18:23:39 UTC 2011


  Hello Saul,


On 04/19/2011 08:55 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/19/2011 07:26 PM, Diana Cionoiu wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I will start by saying that jingle != SIP.
>> Coin it's a nice proposal if you have a SIP client not if you have a
>> Jingle client. Muji it's a nice proposal if you are doing a Jingle only
>> conference without any connection with a system that has a different
>> protocol.
>
> Could you please elaborate on this? Why is Coin not a nice proposal 
> for a Jingle client?

Because Jingle in the first place it's a IM protocol. That part is now 
covered by Muji.

>
>> Each of them have their merits and his crowd of supporters.
>>
>
> Sure!
>
>> But we don't live in a SIP only or Jingle only world.
>>
>> We need a protocol for the Muji crowd which want the mixing to be done
>> in the client side and we need a protocol for the Coin crowd that want
>> the mixing to be done in focus. I'm not a fan of ending up implementing
>> both of them.
>>
>> So my proposal it's different. We need a protocol that will do the
>> following.
>>
>> 1. We need a protocol for audio conference, video conference, remote
>> desktop (one computer shares his desktop and the others are seeing it),
>> file transfer (like when you want several clients to have access to the
>> same file)
>> 2. We need a protocol that handles all situations:
>> - each client has his own mixer
>> - one of the clients does the mixing for all the other clients.
>> - there is one mixer on the conference server (how the conference server
>> handles different nodes it's his implementation and i don't think is
>> within the scope of a xep)
>> 3. We need a protocol capable to handle the entire management of a
>> conference. Like, muting everyone and let just 3 moderators to speak.
>> 4. We need a real "simple" (sorry i couldn't help it) protocol, that
>> will not be the ultimate challenge to implement.
>>
>
> I think that all those points are way too much to call it a protocol. 
> I also don't expect a mobile phone to implement a fully capable focus, 
> but it should be able to join a conference. How would you handle this?
>
I don't expect either for a mobile phone to implement a full capable 
focus. But that doesn't mean that aren't jabber clients desktop based 
like GTalk which can do it. The real question is to make a protocol that 
handles both worlds the desktop and the mobiles.
The fact is that a company like Google or Yahoo or Skype will dislike to 
have a focus (focus = audio/video mixer) on their servers because of the 
bandwidth costs. And we like it or not those are a far larger amount of 
users than the business users which can afford to pay for the bandwidth.

> Implementing two protocols would be a pain, but I don't see how they 
> can be combined, they seem pretty orthogonal to me.
>
I'm working to write a draft about it. Took me about 2 months to make a 
bit of light in some areas that have been covered by shadow.
>
> Regards,
>

Diana


More information about the Jingle mailing list