[Foundation] Controversial?
Joe Hildebrand
hildjj at cursive.net
Wed Aug 13 09:49:37 CDT 2003
Doesn't sound controversial to me for the opposite reason.
http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0111.html
--
Joe Hildebrand
Denver, CO, USA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Lin [mailto:mikelin at MIT.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 7:38 AM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [Foundation] Controversial?
>
>
> this should not be a very controversial proposal because it's not
> really possible. xmpp as it exists today cannot practically
> be used to
> transport realtime binary payloads of any considerable size. the
> argument has been around for a long time, if you do some homework in
> the standards-jig and jdev archives i'm sure you'll find it
> many times
> over.
>
> -mike
>
> On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 03:11 AM, Ulrich B.
> Staudinger wrote:
>
> > Hi members,
> >
> > <flame secure>
> > Ok, this can be somewhat risky and quite somewhat controversial. I
> > think
> > jabber should develop on. We have a very good instant messaging
> > protocol, some issues are still in development (like pubsub
> and message
> > reliability), but are definitely on the right track.
> >
> > But i have a real proposal - add video and audio streams -
> and add it
> > now and not in a year. i have no jep at hand yet, but this is
> > definitely a must. other instant messaging services are under
> > development and will clearly be as good as jabber sooner or later -
> > but all of these miss one
> > feature: video and audio through server. h323 for example
> is definitely
> > not very firewall friendly, endpoints have to 'see' each other.
> >
> > Now jabber could fill this gap and move forward to embed video and
> > audio
> > streams into the protocol and into the server/client (not p2p)
> > environment. Good and work proven server implementations
> exist, as do
> > good jabber clients! Why is jabber not moving? 'Cause we jabber too
> > much.
> >
> > This enhancement clearly is required - it will open up big gates.
> >
> > Maybe some key questions: Should jabber incorporate video and audio
> > streams into an existing connection? Should there be a taskforce of
> > jabberoos taking care of this? Does all this make sense? Or should
> > jabber simply stay the good old xml messaging and presence protocol?
> >
> > </flame secure>
> >
> > ulrich
> >
> > --
> > Ulrich B. Staudinger
> > http://www.die-horde.de
> > email: us at die-horde.de
> > jid: uls at jabber.org
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Members mailing list
> > Members at jabber.org
> > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
>
More information about the Members
mailing list