Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] SIP and GnomeMeeting - please comment

[Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com>]

Le ven 21/02/2003 à 13:47, Christian Strauf a écrit :

> Can you specify the libs you'll use? I'm curious which libs you have in mind.
> 

OPAL, the OpenH323 successor.

> IMHO this is not something that would drive users insane -- this will have
> about the same complexity as any webbrowser that supports both HTTP and FTP --
> and users seem to be able to distinguish between the two. I wouldn't worry
> about the fact that GM will support more than one protocol. In my eyes, this
> will make GM more attractive for the users.
> 

That's my hope too :)

> Not at all. In regards to Kilian's mail, I would like to comment that in my
> opinion, "callto://" is not a URI according to an existing standard and as far
> as I know it doesn't serve any real purpose in GM except for pointing out that
> a call is made to a certain location, meaning, one could easy leave "callto://"
> out of the current version, right? (This is no criticism, I'm just observing
> and asking if you agree on this.) So, introducing "h323://" and "sip://" would
> actually give this URI a meaning (though this would be no real standard, but
> that is no problem).

That would be a real standard for sip: as they defined URIs.
For H.323, it is discussable, they defined you can call users using
[alias ]hostname[:port], without giving a name to that URI type, so I
see no problem using sip: and h323: .

But there is still a problem, in GM, you can use the callto URL format
introduced in Netmeeting by Microsoft :
callto://ils.seconix.com/dsandras seconix com 

I wonder what we could do of that URI, given the fact that it would work
with sip: and h323:. Call it ils: ?

> 
> To be honest, in your place I would throw ILS away and use LDAP instead. If you
> use LDAP, you might be able to add a field which lists all available protocols.
> This would be a direct approach. Of course, this would kind of leave out
> Netmeeting... But even if you kept ILS-support, I would not "guess" the
> protocol by looking at the sappid. You can't be sure that there will always be
> a mapping sappid<->protocol that is relyable. But that's just my personal
> opinion.
> 
We can also add fields. 


-- 
 _	Damien Sandras
(o-	GnomeMeeting: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/
//\	FOSDEM 2003:  http://www.fosdem.org
v_/_	H.323 phone:  callto://ils.seconix.com/dsandras seconix com