Le lundi 24 septembre 2007 à 11:34 +0200, Ali Sabil a écrit : > > Then can you explain us how ICE can help when STUN does not ? I would > > like to see your argumentation here. > > > Correct me if I am wrong, but STUN is generally about finding your > external IP address, and determining the type of NAT you are sitting > behind, it is just a subset of the techniques needed to achieve a > quite reliable NAT traversal. ICE as a method, makes use of STUN among > others. So I don't see why you oppose STUN to ICE ?
Simply because in most of the cases the "STUN part" of ICE is enough. STUN won't work when you are behind Symmetric NAT, in that case you should use a TURN server. I know no public TURN server. So there are still plenty of cases where ICE proposes a solution that does not really help. Although TURN will almost always provide connectivity to a client, it comes at high cost to the provider of the TURN server. It is therefore desirable to use TURN as a last resort only, preferring other mechanisms (such as STUN or direct connectivity) when possible. > > I had decided not to participate to that thread, but there are always > > people who do not know what they are talking about. What a pity. > > I am sorry if I don't know what am talking about, it is just that > Ekiga never worked reliably for me ! And did empathy allow you to do a SIP connection using ICE in a reliable way ? -- _ Damien Sandras (o- //\ Ekiga Softphone : http://www.ekiga.org/ v_/_ NOVACOM : http://www.novacom.be/ FOSDEM : http://www.fosdem.org/ SIP Phone : sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list