[Standards-JIG] Jingle vs. Zoep
jabber.org at ralphm.ik.nu
Wed Feb 8 13:03:50 UTC 2006
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 04:14:41PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> In essence they encapsulate entire SIP packets in an XML wrapper and
> send them over XMPP.
> I think it would be beneficial to discuss the pros and cons of each
> approach (e.g., to determine if it makes sense to publish the OpenZoep
> doc as a JEP).
> What do people think?
I'm not sure if the two approaches have the same goals and starting
points, however, I think the Jingle proposal, because of its inherent
union with the XMPP world, has my preference for implementing multimedia
session negiotiation. For one thing, authentication and authorization of
communicating entities is more straight-forward in the Jingle case
because they are clearly the same entities. For Zoep, there isn't such a
relation as far as I can tell: you have a Jabber ID and a SIP address.
This proposal does not make clear to me how this is handled except for a
reference to ICE. So in that regard, while implementation may be easier,
there are drawbacks, too, apart from the two-stack tax.
Reading JEP-0001, I think the goal of our standards process is to
document the best approach to address a certain problem domain. Although
subjective, I read that to mean making a choice between two proposals
with similar goals. This should also result in better interoperability.
In other areas, we have chosen for relatively simple solutions for
certain problem domains. We have tried to avoid importing other 'stacks'
and their suite of dependency documents, and picking some of the good
stuff out of existing solutions. I am thinking about JEP-0080/JEP-0112
instead of OpenGIS' GML and GeoPriv and our hesitation to use RDF for
profiles, opting to translate on the server if needed.
So, if the Zoep proposal only addresses transporting SIP over Jabber, it
has a different goal then Jingle, which would be acceptable for
publication as a JEP. However, I don't see this proposal competing with
Jingle as the solution for multimedia negiotation *as a JEP*. I don't
want to burden our implementors with multiple competing protocols.
Then, on the Zoep protocol itself, I see there is a <socket_id/> element
being used, that effecively resides in the stream's namespace (usually
jabber:client). That can never be correct, it must be in another
namespace (e.g. Zoep's). Maybe <thread/> could be (ab)used for this
More information about the Standards