[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Skype under Fedora-10

Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 18:05 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote:
That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone
would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p
as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is
that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and
no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that
two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother.

They don't have to do that.  The only peer-to-peer thing really
necessary is the two sides of the conversation.  You don't need to have
a mass of peer-to-peer strangers connected together, this isn't file
It's needed for cases of both ends having nat-connections. You can try other possibilities like STUN which Kevin mentioned, and I remember reading Skype trying it first before resolting the use of 3rd party routing of call. But sometimes STUN just doesn't work and some firewall operators actively fight against it.
There could quite easily be a simple server installed on ISPs, like they
(nearly) all have mail servers, that simply managed the locating of
their users online (status and IP), then the clients direct connect
together.  i.e. The server has a very small, comparatively speaking,

There's no need for there to be abusing individuals as a server for all
and sundry.  And it'd be far better for everyone if ISPs ran a few more
servers, like VOIP and instant messaging, which weren't client

As a partial owner of ISP i can tell you that if somone isn't paying for that server it's not going to happen. For us it would only mean one new server, but with bigger operators it could easily mean couple of them in some kind of cluster and atleast one or two guys keeping it running. Of course then would come goverment demanding for surveilance access.

But as an idea it's nice and would make sense if there was way to make it for free to ISP's. In here it would be because of small margins from fierce competition and what I read in other parts of the world ISP's who have monopolies for their area probably don't want to offer anything which would eat into their profits.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]