[Adium-devl] Jingle, Sip and IAX2 in one step
timber at lava.net
Fri Nov 10 10:25:08 UTC 2006
On Nov 9, 2006, at 5:46 PM, Sean Egan wrote:
> On 11/9/06, Colin Barrett <timber at lava.net> wrote:
>> I think what Sean is *trying* to say is that: in a real-world
>> situation, ICE is necessary to deal with firewalls and such. STUN
>> not, in his experience, cut it.
> I originally said "almost irrelevant," but it's true. Jingle loses A
> LOT without ICE. The main reason the Raw UDP transport was created is
> solely to stream media directly to public servers that don't support
> ICE (such as in interoperating with SIP). The documentation for the
> Raw UDP XEP warns of this. The fact that Raw UDP is so much easier to
> implement than ICE is worrisome; if major clients like Adium decide
> Raw UDP is good enough, it will greatly impact the utility of Jingle
> for the worse.
As I said, we definitely want things to Just Work as much of the time
as possible, and we certainly don't want to kill Jingle! :)
>> I'd like a little bit more about the various ways ICE tries to manage
>> things, but that's more just curiosity. Having Adium Just Work no
>> matter what the networks situation is something we've been trying to
>> work on, and I think having our AV stuff do that from the get go
>> be a BIG step in that direction
> To satisfy your curiousity...
> All this ICE stuff succeeds in getting through 92% of the time,
> according to Google's stats. I don't have a source to cite, but I
> recall hearing that STUN alone is a little over 80%
Nice. Each of those %age points gets harder and harder to get, so
going from 80 to 92 is pretty good.
> This is not even to mention crazy scenarios libjingle takes care of
> like corporate firewalls that block everything but HTTPS.
>> I also I agree with Evan, we should target the Jingle spec as best we
>> can with it being a moving target. It looks like we're going to need
>> to use ICE, though. Alvaro, what are your thoughts?
> *Please* go with ICE. It's certainly a lot more complex, but it's
> really important for the entire XMPP network to standardize on this.
I think Andy makes an important point in talking about IPv6. How much
pain would ICE cause with end-to-end IPv6? Or would it just not even
come in to play?
This is a really interesting discussion. I think the next thing we
want to look at is implementation: where would the ICE code be? Smack?
in Adium? If it's in Adium, can we use libjingle for connection
negotiation while still using Smack for XMPP requests? I'm assuming
that Jingle operates out-of-band from the normal XMPP stream. At what
point does it switch from in-band to out-of-band?
More information about the Adium-devl