It is really cool to now how many new Jingle implementers.
In Jingle Thingle 2009 I noticed that the big SIP Companies were not only just present in the meeting, but also demonstrating and testing their Jingle implementations.
We know that Google is being using Jingle on GTalk to provide Voice and File Transfers for several years, but what we don't know or maybe we didn't summarize is:
* AOL Messaging migrate to XMPP.
* Nimbuzz migrate several millions of Mobile Clients from SIP to Jingle.
* Twitter solved their scalability problems with XMPP.
* CISCO the most important SIP vendor, bought Jabber.
* OpenSER has a XMPP interoperability module.
* Asterisk has now embed support for Jingle.
* YATE has the first real full featured PBX using Jingle.
* Nokia is planning to launch a smart phone with XMPP/Jingle embeded support.
So it really seems like the simple facts that in Jingle you can negotiate several transport types, several contents in the same session opened the minds of these SIP companies to have a look on it. And the fact of Jingle in real use cases is more reliable and much easier to
implement than SIP, consolidating the protocol as the internet age multimedia signalling negotiating protocol.
Follow Jingle specification evolutions at:
XEP-0166 - Jingle
XEP-0167 - Jingle RTP Sessions
XEP-0176 - Jingle ICE-UDP Transport Method
XEP-0177 - Jingle Raw UDP Transport Method
XEP-0234 - Jingle File Transfer
XEP-0251 - Jingle Session Transfer
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
SIP Providers P2P Try-out Fails
Some SIP providers and server developers thinks that it is possible to guess if a user can send/receive RTP traffic direct in his IP if the SIP Signaling network is public IP.
WRONG!
The correct way to do this is using a connectivity check algorithm (STUN, ECHO, etc...) based on the UDP Channel that you may use to send/receive the streaming.
SIP Providers, stop doing guesses about User Agents NAT description based on the signaling channel.
This kills the interoperability of your SIP Services.
WRONG!
The correct way to do this is using a connectivity check algorithm (STUN, ECHO, etc...) based on the UDP Channel that you may use to send/receive the streaming.
SIP Providers, stop doing guesses about User Agents NAT description based on the signaling channel.
This kills the interoperability of your SIP Services.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Pretty Little Random World
Did you ever wonder why everything is random in our reality?
People Tastes, DNA, plants size and forms, animals behavior, human habits, weather, quantic atomic behavior, Friends Humor, etc...
Everything in nature is random this is an old fact.
But, why? What is the cause and goal of this?
To give a try I will start explaining the paradox of the random concept:
"Random is everything that causes a reaction that cannot be predicted before the respective action."
So to affirm that an action produces a random reaction, you MUST know that you cannot predict the reaction. But can you prove that you cannot predict the reaction?
"If everything is random, how can you predict that a reaction is random, if the reaction is random?"
Conceptually a random reaction can repeat forever(infinity times) given an unique action, and still be considered random.
So in fact, what is "Random"?
To explain the Random, you always need to rely on the infinity concept. Which brings even more doubts as infinity still something not clear for human minds.
In an orthodox proposition:
"Random is a reaction that given infinity tries, can generates different results."
Conclusion:
It is not possible to prove that a reaction is random if you cannot counter prove against the infinity. Which means that every affirmative that a reaction is random it simply another random guess.
This conclusion also explains why all human attempts of generating artificial "pure random" failed.
People Tastes, DNA, plants size and forms, animals behavior, human habits, weather, quantic atomic behavior, Friends Humor, etc...
Everything in nature is random this is an old fact.
But, why? What is the cause and goal of this?
To give a try I will start explaining the paradox of the random concept:
"Random is everything that causes a reaction that cannot be predicted before the respective action."
So to affirm that an action produces a random reaction, you MUST know that you cannot predict the reaction. But can you prove that you cannot predict the reaction?
"If everything is random, how can you predict that a reaction is random, if the reaction is random?"
Conceptually a random reaction can repeat forever(infinity times) given an unique action, and still be considered random.
So in fact, what is "Random"?
To explain the Random, you always need to rely on the infinity concept. Which brings even more doubts as infinity still something not clear for human minds.
In an orthodox proposition:
"Random is a reaction that given infinity tries, can generates different results."
Conclusion:
It is not possible to prove that a reaction is random if you cannot counter prove against the infinity. Which means that every affirmative that a reaction is random it simply another random guess.
This conclusion also explains why all human attempts of generating artificial "pure random" failed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
