[Standards-JIG] Jingle vs. Zoep

dirk.griffioen@voipster.com dgriffioen at voipster.com
Fri Feb 10 17:08:17 UTC 2006

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>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
>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.
This is true (and well appriciated!) - in this light, should I add more?

>- --
>Peter Saint-Andre
>Jabber Software Foundation
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20060210/627965bc/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list