Scott, That's putting it quite diplomatically. Here's how I'd say it...
Cisco infects... They take emerging standards, dump millions into making their own version of it, wait for everyone else to use an open standard, do a half-assed implementation of said open standard in their own product, then use that as a wedge to sell more of their proprietary stack -- which of course works better on their own kit. I have no reason to think that their SIP implementation is anything other than that. -- Robert On 4/22/2010 4:31 PM, Scott Lawrence wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 12:25 -0700, Nathan Nieblas wrote: > > >> Cisco follows IETF standards for SIP >> > With all due respect to Cisco, that statement doesn't mean very much. > > There are lots of documents that make up 'standards for SIP', and many > ways in which implementations can be incompatible while still making the > claim that they 'follow' some spec. > > Doubtless we will eventually be able to figure out what the issue that > started this thread is, and possibly configure around it. We may be > able to make a change that prevents the problem but preserves > compatibility with the other phones. > > It is true that the core development team does not normally test much > with Cisco phones - they just are not that high a priority for us. The > configuration support for them is mostly from the community, and for > that we are very appreciative. > > If you want to use phones that we test with thoroughly, today that means > mostly Polycom, the Counterpath Bria, and various of the Avaya phones. > Other phones work, but generally are not as well tested by the core > team, and configuration support for them varies more in quality and > frequency of updates. > > > _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
