[Freedombox-discuss] FreedomBox VoIP/IM/Comms (SIP and Jabber), Jingle Nodes, SIP RELOAD

Marc Petit-Huguenin marc at petit-huguenin.org
Sun Sep 23 15:49:28 UTC 2012

Hash: SHA256

On 09/23/2012 08:16 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 19/09/12 23:31, Wookey wrote:
>> +++ Ramana Kumar [2012-09-19 15:37 +0100]:
>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Daniel Pocock
>>> <[1]daniel at pocock.com.au> wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
>>> On 19/09/12 14:32, Ramana Kumar wrote:
>>>> This page might be mildly relevant: 
>>>> [2]http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Skype_Replacement
>>> I heard about FSF Europe running a Skype Replacement event on the 
>>> weekend, testing the different clients against each other.  Their goal 
>>> is very general, moving people from closed source to Free software
>>> Any more info about this? Did they find anything that worked?
>> Results here: etherpad.fsfe.org/RX7S6q45gQ
>> The testing was of a fairly basic nature - install stuff, get free SIP or
>> jabber account (or use existing one) and see if you can talk/chat/video
>> with people. representative of 'normal people' trying this out. The
>> SIP/XMPP account/server used was not recorded in most cases, which I
>> think is insuficient for repeatable tests.
>> More combinations failed than worked, but some worked. Most of my 
>> connecitons failed even though I have used my SIP hardphone successfully
>> for years (seemed to be local DNS failure), and my n900 SIP successfully
>> in many other contexts.
>> It was a worthwhile start but I think there is enormous scope for further
>> such sessions, including using servers under our control.
> I would certainly like to be involved in that and contribute what resources
> I can to support it
> I believe the testing needs to be a little bit more scientific and not just
> take the `black box' approach, assessing each product on the following
> perhaps:
> - supported codecs (e.g. patent free, suitable for mobile, ...)  - and 
> which products support the codecs that other products use (matrix)?

WebRTC did the right thing in mandating G.711 (uLaw & Alaw) and Opus in all


If all open source/free software implementers pledge to implement those two
codecs in their implementation, then we hopefully can stop having this
discussion and focus on the other points.


> - which solutions support NAT traversal?  Is every permutation of NAT and
> firewall environment tested?  ICE/STUN/TURN is good for this, but client
> software support is not always 100% (e.g. Jitsi supports ICE with Jabber,
> but not with SIP.  Lumicall supports ICE, but there are some shortcomings,
> just look for the FIXMEs in the code to find out what they are)

I would like to point out that there is currently a call for comments in
MMUSIC on revising the ICE specification, following the experience accumulated
this last few years:


- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc at petit-huguenin.org
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list