I haven't followed it in years, but P2P-SIP is the IETF working group over those standards. I was reasonably active for a few years. My take is they were obsessed with discussing and planning for theoretical edge cases without any regard to the mainstream cases that matter in reality. So far as I know, they never produced anything remotely useful or valuable -- the closes they came were a few insanely overengineered research projects that couldn't interoperate and that nobody used outside the lab. But it's been a couple years so it might be worth checking up on them.
-david On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Michiel de Jong <mich...@unhosted.org> wrote: > Hi! > > Just found this thread from January, > > On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:47 PM, David Barrett <dbarr...@quinthar.com> wrote: >> And I would unquestionably ignore STUN, TURN, ICE, P2P-SIP, etc. What a >> disaster. > > Thanks for the warning, where can I read more about this? For > webp2p.org we are focused on webrtc which seems to be based on stun, > turn and ice. Should we be worried? Many thanks for any pointers! > > Cheers, > Michiel > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
