[Standards] Jingle bootstrapping

Thiago Camargo thiago at jivesoftware.com
Fri Mar 2 17:41:30 UTC 2007


XEP-65 has nothing related with what I'm talking about.
SOCKS5 for voice and video? Is it a joke?

We can evolve or still thinking inside the SIP Box....

We now have a TCP channel to negotiate (XMPP Connection)... We don't have ANY reasons to still using Protocols that was designed for UDP SIP signaling...

Jingle transports isn't an approved standard yet. Maybe we have some reasons to wait for better solutions. Let's discuss new ideas.

If we want to stay using pure STUN and pure ICE solutions, I can't see any reasons to use jingle instead of SIP.

Let's use our community to build the best solution for Multimedia Signaling and Negotiation. Let's build something new and better then what we already have today

Let's show why XMPP + Jingle could be the next Signaling protocol.

Regards,
Thiago


-----Original Message-----
From: standards-bounces at xmpp.org [mailto:standards-bounces at xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Justin Karneges
Sent: sexta-feira, 2 de março de 2007 05:49
To: XMPP Extension Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Standards] Jingle bootstrapping

On Thursday 01 March 2007 6:26 pm, Thiago Camargo wrote:
> It's very fast, reliable and don't demands many implementations using
> another protocols then XMPP. Our goal is to get a fastest, reliable and
> XMPP only, transport negotiation. We already started some tests to get rid
> of STUN Servers as soon as we can. Building a reliable XMPP Only transport
> negotiation.

For an XMPP-style solution, we already have XEP-65.  It supports TCP and UDP, 
direct or relayed.  Anything missing is covered by the Psi extension.  I had 
this problem solved 3 years ago. :)

But that doesn't really matter.  The reason there is interest in STUN and STUN 
Relaying is because they are being approved within the IETF.  We would do 
well to adopt these protocols instead of (or in place of) our own.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list