[Standards-JIG] Jingle vs. Zoep

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Fri Feb 10 02:36:49 UTC 2006


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

dirk.griffioen at voipster.com wrote:

> I do agree that both protocols came from a different background,  and
> secondly that Jingle could learn from the SIP workgroup in what to
> avoid; but already there is a comment that Jingle is getting to big and
> is 'overstepping its boundaries'. Are you not afraid this will happen
> again? And we will end up with a second 250 pages+ protocol description
> with possible implementation hardship.

Remember, the SIP spec is 250+ pages essentially without examples. :-) A
few years ago someone started to write an I-D that tried to explain
exactly how all the various SIP RFCs could be used to build and deploy
real-world systems. IIRC his document was 60 pages and most of it said
"TBD".

Now you could say we're going down the same road in XMPP-land. All these
damn JEPs, how do you know which ones to use, etc. We could do better in
this regard (maybe just shut down the JSF entirely, no more JEPs!), but
at least our long specs have a ton of examples.

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD6/xBNF1RSzyt3NURAtA2AJ90IhNK7JfLl3HTAqkrkX0otoVl9wCgrGEA
Hn5PKG7XzcUIlL9XNkgsOpg=
=V4Hs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3641 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20060209/fb9417e2/attachment.bin>


More information about the Standards mailing list