[Standards-JIG] Re: [Psi-devel] Re: Implementing voice conversations in PSI
Cesar Martinez Izquierdo
listas at ono.com
Sat May 14 16:49:25 UTC 2005
Sorry, I sent this to the wrong list :-(
Hopefully, it is not so much off-topic here.
El Sábado 14 Mayo 2005 19:46, Cesar Martinez Izquierdo escribió:
> The main problems of TINS are:
> - the client developers are not very enthusiastic with it (and thus they
> are not implementing it)
> - TINS makes mainly the same as SIP+SDP, but it uses some XPPP commands +
> SDP. While this makes TINS more XMPP-friendly, it breaks compatibility with
> SIP, which means that you can't use existing SIP libraries (so more
> expensive implementation), you can't phone directly to Voip providers
> (which are mostly using SIP) and it doesn't offer a clear advantage over
> the SIP+SDP approach.
> For finishing my project, now I need a proof-of-concept implementation, and
> I will not use TINS (because I've concluded that the other approach is
> Now, let's speak about PSI.
> We can define some steps:
> - First of all I will create the proof-of-concept implementation for my
> project at university. I'm quite in a hurry, so maybe I will not care about
> the interface and maybe I even use an external application for perform the
> actual phone call. I'm understanding the PSI code quite fast, so I think I
> will have something working really soon (but it will not be suitable for
> official PSI, for sure).
> - After this, we can discuss in which way we prefer to have voip in PSI,
> either with TINS or developing further the code I did in the previous step.
> Note that I'm not against TINS, despite I'm not using it for my project. If
> we conclude that we prefer TINS in PSI, I'd be happy to work on it.
> We can also discuss about how the interface should look.
> And then we can finish the voip implementation. I think we can reuse some
> SIP (or SDP if we implement TINS) libraries, but we'll see.
> But I repeat that I'm currently in a hurry about my project, so I'd prefer
> to don't spend too much time now discussing about this implementation. In
> some week I will show you what I did, and then I'll have time to properly
> discuss about the better implementation in PSI.
> (By the way, you metioned SDP and RTSP. SDP + RTP are what both SIP and
> TINS use to negotiate and preform the conversations, as far as I know.
> And I didn't know about RTSP, I'll have a look).
More information about the Standards