On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Aaron Clauson <aaron at sipsorcery.com> wrote: > _----Original Message----- > From: pjsip-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pjsip-bounces at lists.pjsip.org] > On Behalf Of Benny Prijono > Sent: Friday, 10 December 2010 11:17 PM > To: pjsip list > Subject: Re: Pseudo ICE feature request for GTalk XMPP interop > >> we're probably not interested in adding GTalk's "ICE" protocol, since we > can't talk directly with it >> anyway. > > There's no reason why you the pjsip stack couldn't talk to GTalk. On the > signalling front it would mean adding some XMPP client capabilities. And there you go. There's little value in adding GTalk's "ICE" unless you talk XMPP first. > I > recently did some work on that front and compared to implementing a SIP > stack XMPP is incredibly easy; no transactions, no ACK's with different > branch ID's etc. etc. On the media front the GTalk server uses plain old RTP > so apart from the accommodation of the pseudo-ICE STUN requests there's no > work to do. > Nobody is arguing the simplicity of the protocol. But whether it's interesting to implement that's different matter. Since you have the interest, and you've found it easy, why don't you have a go yourself? Benny
