Re: [Ekiga-list] [Ekiga-devel-list] Ekiga 3.00 available for WIN32 *only*

["Rene Bartsch" <ML Bartschnet de>]

> Stu,
>
>> I have used [Skype] for 2 years very successfully.
>
> I had been forced into using Skype quite a number of times through the
last years and I have some mixed experience with it. But that's not at
all the point.
>
> The question is rather: Would you want to use a closed user group email
system on which you can only write mails to people having an account on
the same system and where you couldn't use your favorite MUA to read
mail, but the only available option would be the closed source binary
only specific OS platforms only mail client that comes with the service?

[Closed Source] => You don't know if NSA is listening (or whoever) ;)

> I remember using two such systems back in the 80ies, one we may all
remember, it was called CompuServe, the other one (for the Germans here)
was BTX, the predecessor of T-Online. But 20 years have passed since
then and even they pretty soon installed an Internet mail gateway to
leverage Metcalfe's Law. They have been a bit slow when it comes to
waiving their proprietary software and opening it up to POP3/IMAP/SMTP,
though.
>
> Why are people so happy to leap back that 20 years when it comes to VoIP
telephony?

This are the same people using the a closed OS called "Windows" ;)

> But nobody wants a monopoly, right? So we want competition. But how many
different apps to you want to install onto your PC to make sure
everybody else can reach you? How many contact IDs from different
networks do you want to give out to people to be able to call you?
Espeially given, that there is simple no need for these except to keep
Skype Inc. and similar companies happy.

Competition is very good - if all you use the same patent free open
standards protocol ;)

> There are two universal addressing systems available to make an audio or
video call to people. One was invented by the ITU a long time ago and is
known as the world telephone numbering plan. The other one is known as a
SIP address (that stuff which looks like an email address, i.e.
> sip:someone somehwere com).

Don't forget IAX2 addressing sheme.

> While SIP addresses are easier to memorize, they are somewhat hard to
enter on classic phone devices (these gizmos with a 0-9 keypad), which
is why a mapping from telephone numbers to SIP addresses makes sense.
There is a well defined and accepted worldwide standard for this, known
as ENUM.

I agree, ENUM is very important to bridge between PSTN and VoIP!

> If I want to keep my contact details short, then all I need is a phone
number and a SIP address which can be the same as I email address if I
want to. Two things to remember for anyone who wants to contact me. And
I can decide on which terminal device I will accept communication and I
am free to switch my user agent if I feel a need for it.

Why two??? Just put your SIP-, IAX2- or email-address into an ENUM-NAPTR ;)

> I can see a number of roadblocks for the further success of VoIP telephony:
>
> * Protocol fight. That SIP / H.323 / IAX2 thing is like the VHS / Beta
or HD-DVD / BlueRay thing. Did SMTP / RFC822 ever have to seriously
compete against any other protocols? I am very frustrated that often I
can find a VoIP termination provider which is offering nice rates for a
certain destination, but unfortunately, they don't speak my protocol.

That's quite a fault by the IETF. The IETF didn't want to have two
protocols competing against each other, so they decided to accept only one
as RFC. But what they didn't consider was that the first protocol on the
market (SIP) can just be a mess. So we have the situation that everyone
has to use SIP as it's standardized, but people who are frustrated of
failed an choppy calls switch to the far more better IAX2. So IETF
achieved what they didn't want - two competing protocols.

Hardware vendors - like SNOM - want to switch to IAX2, but no standard, no
implementation :(

So I hope IETF or ITU accept IAX2 as standard and we can bury SIP finally.

> * The de-facto ENUM boycott. There is exactly one way to handle this
IMO: Regulation. Period. Telco's don't want is, as they did not want
number portability as they did not want a lot of other things.

You're right. Regulators should just force the telcos to evaluate ENUM at
each call. That way each user can have his custom routing.

The next step would be to force the telcos to terminate with SIP/IAX2.

> * Flatrates and the GSM revolution. I know a number of countries where
people know fixed line phones just from old movies and laught at it.
Where people still use landline phones, more often than not you can get
a flatrate for unlimited national landline calls, for a bit more also
national mobile networks or landlines on the same continent. The
argument that VoIP is cheaper only work in niche situations any more. On
the other hand, if GSM operators keep one thing up, it's their
termination fees. (They usually keep them exactly at what the regulators
allow them to charge.)

UMTS phones use SIP, too ;) But you get charged for a satelite call and
telcos explicitly deny the use of own VoIP on data connections. :(

Regards,

Renne