[Standards-JIG] Jingle vs. Zoep

Tijl Houtbeckers thoutbeckers at splendo.com
Wed Feb 8 23:31:12 UTC 2006


On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:14:41 +0100, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org>  
wrote:

>
> http://www.openzoep.org/docs/jabber/jep-0xxx.html
>
> What do people think?

This JEP describes a way to transport SIP session data over XMPP. That  
offers several advantages:

- Extremly easy gatewaying between the vast SIP network and XMPP.
- More SIP clients can start adding XMPP for non-voip features
- SIP clients can take advantage of doing connection level singnaling  
using XMPP, and XMPP identities.
- XMPP clients that need the more advanced VoIP features provided by SIP  
(available standards and implementations) can easily use them.

It's true Jingle and SIP overlap for a large part, but that's no argument  
to discard either. Zoep and Voipster are the proof of this. Extending  
Jingle to support all SIP features will make it a second TINS. Telling  
people to use Jingle or get lost when they need SIP features or SIP  
interoperation is also a bad idea. That doesn't rule out anyone making a  
Jingle/VoIP gateway if they want to (just like a TINS/SIP gateway could  
have been made).

As for people on this list not liking SIP, I haven't noticed, I'm sure  
many people use SIP a lot, wether they're aware of it or not, and of  
course we've seen earlier intergration attemps (using uris). Now SIMPLE,  
that's another thing.. however SIMPLE has little to do with this, other  
than that this would give people using SIP a better alternative over  
SIMPLE.

I agree that the proposal might need some more work however on the  
relation between XMPP and SIP elements.



More information about the Standards mailing list