[*] XMPP & SIP/SIMPLE

[Dan Keizer]

got bumped ;-) .. here it is again :-)

Dan.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan Keizer <ve4drk at gmail.com>
Date: Feb 10, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: RE: XMPP & SIP/SIMPLE
To: asterisk at muug.mb.ca

> Dan, further to your questions about XMPP. I bumped into this article by Peter
> Saint-Andre (patron saint of Jabber)
>


> http://www.saint-andre.com/blog/2005-09.html#2005-09-02T14:47 <http://www.saint-andre.com/blog/2005-09.html#2005-09-02T14:47>
>
> Boy it is certainly not clear where we are gong with VoIP :-)

Hi Bill ... thanks for the link, yes, the water is muddied for sure --
but mostly (I think) because of entrenched supporters with their own
agendas.


Purely from a technical standpoint, it makes sense to use XMPP.  He
does describe dual-headed clients that support both xmpp and sip ..
somewhat analogous to the pulver pro beta client.

Here's an old article describing some of the issues:


http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/05/23/21FExmpp_1.html
and the person involved is now at cisco:
http://www.jdrosen.net/

and from the jabber group itself:
http://www.jabber.com/index.cgi?CONTENT_ID=55&VMX_TRACKED=YES
and ...
http://www.jabber.org/protocol/xmpp-simple.shtml
and some other comparisons from a commercial standpoint:
http://www.jabber.com/index.cgi?CONTENT_ID=619&VMX_TRACKED=YES

Note that there are a ton of RFC's describing extensions to sip to
make it do what xmpp already does.

I think the one item that SIP/SIMPLE has going for it in one aspect is
that of point-to-point communications


with no intermediary server requirement for transport once sessions
are implemented (excluding gateways etc obviously)...
The perceived need for telco's to provide that type of infrastructure
appears to be somewhat relevent.



Dan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.muug.mb.ca/pipermail/asterisk/attachments/20060210/c6572d6b/attachment.html