As I said, I'm perfectly willing to move this over to be a JEP, if that's what the community wants. If no one objects, in the next few days I'll try to reformat the doc into a JEP.
-- Joe Hildebrand > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacek Konieczny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 12:51 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [standards-jig] Re: [JDEV] Voice over IP > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 03:50:35PM -0600, Joe Hildebrand wrote: > > Yes, you should look more into sdpng. > > > > http://www.dmn.tzi.org/ietf/mmusic/sdp-ng/, and in particular: > > > > > http://www.dmn.tzi.org/ietf/mmusic/sdp-ng/drafts/draft-ietf-mm > usic-sdpng-06. > > txt > > I have skim read this draft. Generally I like it, but there > are things I dont like about it. > > - I would prefer it as JEP rather then IETF draft > > - Why messages are used? It seems OK for invitation, but for nothing > more. However I am not sure how to make it well with <iq/> neither. > > - Some stream/proxy negotiation before SDP is used would be nice. But > this may be covered by another document (some JEP I hope). Maybe the > protocol should allow to use a man in the middle (proxy component of > XMPP server), which could proxy UDP streams and rewrite SDP > data. For > this to work tins recipient addres has to be different than message > recipient address. > Other solutiwon would be transparent proxying, but I don't like it > - this would require servers to inspect all passed messages. > > - Why this draft is so hidden? If you didn't sent links here I will > probably not know it exists. Thats why I would prefer it as JEP. > > Greets, > Jacek > _______________________________________________ > Standards-JIG mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig > _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
