Re: [Openh323gk-users] RTC and GnuGk
H.323 Gatekeeper for VoIP and videconferencing
Brought to you by:
willamowius
Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Openh323gk-users] RTC and GnuGk
|
From: Lucian G. <lu...@gl...> - 2008-01-09 09:40:19
|
> It is. I swear, this stuff is much easier, more interoperable and scalable > in H.323 than protocols like SIP. Just everyone wants the one-trick pony. I'm going to take your word for it, I know my way around C++ but I'm not a programmer myself. However, after reading the ietf sip draft I can write a UAC or a UAS in perl in a matter of days, but writing anything for h.323 from scratch would take me forever. When the services get as complexe as RTC you may want to have a simple protocol that can be coded easily by many in order to make it grow. > Classic case in point of why doing RTC in H.323 is easier than SIP. The > equivalent to P2Pnat media in SIP is ICE. ICE is 5 years in development, now > in draft version 15? is over 120 pages long, extremely complex and still a > call can fail due to NAT, is not interoperable with standard RTP, can have > long delays establishing calls etc etc. Now compare that with P2Pnat Media > which ITU submission is about 25 pages formatted and in GnuGk is about 50 > lines of code and as you say it "works like a charm". It takes a great mind to build great things. I refuse to think that, if you'd concentrate your effort on sip nat traversal you wouldn't do it. However, I didn't have big problems with SIP under NAT so far. > BTW: If someone has a cool GUI idea for PacPhone and is not overly complex > and is not going to be a huge amount of rejigging, I am very interested. :) I would suggest a skype-like GUI, or, if you used MS Office Communicator I would say it has the best GUI from what I've used. If GnuGK takes this road, even if I'm a fan of h.323 in favour of SIP, I would say it needs to go multiprotocol and do some SIP stuff as well. There is a very simple reason for that - mobile phones. The most popular mobile phones have a sip client now. I have one myself and it works perfectly over wifi (under nat). A "follow me" service should work with both protocols ?? This is the market trend in mobile phones, you can't change it and even if you'd make pacphone to work under windows mobile or symbian os, it still wouldn't be intergrated with the phone like the sip client is and many people won't be able to install it anyway. I would love to see the day when I would do RTC with PacPhone and gnugk and use a follow-me service with a sip client ! Lucian > -----Original Message----- > From: ope...@li... > [mailto:ope...@li...]On Behalf Of > Lucian Gheorghe > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 12:03 AM > To: 'GNU Gatekeeper Users' > Subject: Re: [Openh323gk-users] GnuGK vs MERA MVTS > > > If voip is dead, h.323 will go down with it. Real-Time communications are > and should be built using protocols that are much easier to code. Skype is > not the only one who did it, take the example of Cisco Unified > Communications or Microsoft OCS/LCS (based on sip). There are already > companies creating OCS/LCS federations with PSTN integration, e.g. > www.interouteone.com > I'm not sure Gnugk shouldn go down this road, it's far more difficult to > code complex apps with h.323 than with any other protocol. > Anyway, this discution got out of topic, I was just making a comparison, > like Jan requested, between GNUGK and another commercial switch. > I admire your efforts to do presence with h.323 and your P2pnat > media works > like a charm. > > Regarding my statement about X-lite and PacPhone, I know X-Lite is SIP and > it's the market trend, but for some (like me) the GUI is very > important in a > product. If there would be a h.323 version of X-lite using p2pnat media, I > would imediately switch to that instead of the Sip solution. > > Cheers, > Lucian > > -----Original Message----- > From: ope...@li... > [mailto:ope...@li...] On Behalf Of Simon > Horne > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:33 PM > To: GNU Gatekeeper Users > Subject: Re: [Openh323gk-users] GnuGK vs MERA MVTS > > > Lucian > > > -----Original Message----- > > Lucian Gheorghe > > Also, Simon's PacPhone is a fantastic product and it works with GNUGK > > perfectly. All it needs is better graphics which is probably > why there are > > more users implementing (* and X-lite) than (Gnugk and PacPhone). > > Thanks, the big difference is X-Lite is SIP and PacPhone is H.323. Side by > side it will lose out regardless whether it has the better graphics, that > just the nature of the industry and really doesn't worry me, the > purpose of > PacPhone is not to better than X-Lite, it is being developed to suit a > particular need in the market. > > Since joining the project in 2006, I have never looked at GnuGk > has beening > a carrier grade anything although I have done some small carrier > deployments > with it. I'm definitely focused on the future, and IMHO for GnuGK > to become > more relevent it has to focus on features and applications and not just > VoIP termination. NAT/firewall support and a broader range of routing > policies (ENUM,SRV,RDS) makes it more versatile and scalable. > Work is still > continuing with P2Pnat Media (Nat Traversal without proxying media) and a > scalable intergatekeeper presence system due for the v2.2.8 release. > > I gave a talk a few months back called "VoIP is Dead. Long Live Real-Time > Communications". The crux of the talk was about the need to be more than > VoIP. Application sharing, multipoint video conferencing, file transfer, > Presence, directory services, text and multimedia messaging, media > encryption, NAT traversal. All the things that were promised at > the dawn of > VoIP but (with the exception for skype) have never been > delivered. My desire > is for this to become a reality and GnuGk is a key component of that. > > I think you have to also look at the great work Jan is doing with call > bridging (GnuGk initiated calls), the new SQL routing policy (for > least cost > routing), the call fallover and ACD support and you can see that > GnuGk is a > lot more than a poor man's SBC. > > IMHO so what if GnuGk is not a carrier switch, To me it's a lot more than > that and a very versatile, scalable free piece of software. > > My 2 cents. > > Simon > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/m arketplace _______________________________________________________ Posting: mailto:Ope...@li... Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=openh323gk-users Unsubscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________________ Posting: mailto:Ope...@li... Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=openh323gk-users Unsubscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________________ Posting: mailto:Ope...@li... Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=openh323gk-users Unsubscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/ |