On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 02:47:26 -0500, Jim Van Meggelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should not quote an open-source guru or a guy. It undermines
your credibility. Name the person you are quoting (Jon 'Maddog' Hall,
President, Linux International), and provide links to prove your claim.
Here,
, 2004 3:38 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IAX really isn't the 'one and only' perfect signaling protocol
IAX is *not* a signalling protocol. It is a VoIP protocol.
And that's
On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:09:41 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is already one chipmaker who thought that
IAX was important or competitive advantage enough
to embed it into their chip.
Which?
the PA1688
admittedly, not the best piece of silicon around, and some
If you refer to the urban legend that IAX always needs a server to
stay in the media path, then you would be wrong. IAX has a mechanism
that for all practical purposes is equivalent to a SIP reinvite
through which the end points then transition to a mode by which they
communicate directly peer to
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:50:07 +0400, Jean-Michel Hiver
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Out of interest, how would this work in a situation where two IAX
compliant devices (i.e. IAXy) are behind a non-configured natted network
(i.e. where no port forwarding has been setup)? Is it necessary to set
up
On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 20:57, Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:50:07 +0400, Jean-Michel Hiver
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Out of interest, how would this work in a situation where two IAX
compliant devices (i.e. IAXy) are behind a non-configured natted network
Actually, I assume the above (2 x IAX devices behind a single NAT
router) would work perfectly without any special configuration EXCEPT in
the (perhaps most common case) where both IAX devices are talking to the
same IAX server.
Could you explain why it would be a problem if both devices were
On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 21:33, Jean-Michel Hiver wrote:
Actually, I assume the above (2 x IAX devices behind a single NAT
router) would work perfectly without any special configuration EXCEPT in
the (perhaps most common case) where both IAX devices are talking to the
same IAX server.
On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:09:41 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is already one chipmaker who thought that
IAX was important or competitive advantage enough
to embed it into their chip.
Which?
the PA1688
admittedly, not the best piece of silicon around, and some people who
On Tuesday 02 November 2004 02:47, Steve Totaro wrote:
This thread was started by Randy Bush, thought that name rang a bell. Good
conversation nonetheless.
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2004-July/053278.html
No, Randy didn't start this thread.
He simply answered a post in
Karl Brose wrote:
[...]
The reality about IAX vs SIP looks much different.
SIP quickly replaced H323 in the market of voip endpoint devices
and call termination/origination because of its design simplicity,
transparency and easy debugging potential because it's text-based and
built on existing
Steve Totaro wrote:
Sure I remember. Up until a year ago I believe it was still being
manufactured and supported by Sony.
Their mistake was keeping proprietary. A parallel cannot be drawn.
If anything, you prove my point in that VHS was the underdog and won
the battle.
That is often said,
No worries here. What works best will win out eventually.
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Voip Business [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
what does
is part of that marketing.
-Michael
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Voip Business [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
what does the RFC's guys
.
being
a published standard is part of that marketing.
-Michael
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Voip Business [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
what does
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:asterisk-users-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:53 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
is part of that marketing.
-Michael
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Voip Business [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
what does the RFC's guys
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 13:20 -0500, Brent Franks wrote:
Not old enough to remember this, but wasn't Beta better than VHS?
Yes and professional equipment used it.
--
Dave Cotton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
a published standard is part of that marketing.
-Michael
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Voip Business [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
what does
/28/1030053075578.html?oneclick=true
- Original Message -
From: Dave Cotton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 1:28 PM
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 13:20 -0500, Brent Franks wrote
Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
Sure I remember. Up until a year ago I believe it was still being
manufactured and supported by Sony.
Their mistake was keeping
-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
I see your point and it is well taken but I feel that with convergence you
are going to see more IT staff in charge of phone systems. In turn, I see
more research and informed decisions going on, not just
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:13:15 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless SIP just plain does not work, I think it'll be hard (for IAX to get
excellent acceptance),
Funny you should say that from the comfort of your first world
environment. In many countries internet infrastructure
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:13:15 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless SIP just plain does not work, I think it'll be hard (for IAX to
get
excellent acceptance),
Funny you should say that from the comfort of your first world
environment. In many countries internet infrastructure
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael
Giagnocavo
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 11:13 PM
To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
Unless SIP just plain does not work, I think it'll be hard (for IAX to
get excellent
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:14:37 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there, I'm in Guatemala. My current connectivity is via a modem (poorly
implemented EVDO or CDMA, whichever is actually working at the moment).
Before that we were using satellite. The telco tried to hook up ADSL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
IAX really isn't the 'one and only' perfect signaling protocol because
many people forget one thing
IAX has one technical issue (by design) which makes it difficult to ever
get accepted by the big boys, a real big problem for carriers who have
big loads on their
Precisely. First world environment!
Try travelling in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia, where
everything is still mostly dialup and many of the phone wires
installed go back before the time when plastic was invented.
So SIP doesn't work on dialup? That's funny 'cause I'm using it like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--SNIPSTA--
Anyhow, the situation now, is that there is no DSP chip, that means ..
Your main processor has to encode the channel in total (3 to 4 E1's
absolute is the max possible with dual xeon 3 ghz I read somewhere in
this case)
This has a problem. PC's are so cheap
Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--SNIPSTA--
Anyhow, the situation now, is that there is no DSP chip, that means ..
Your main processor has to encode the channel in total (3 to 4 E1's
absolute
Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:
IAX is so vastly superior to SIP, that the comparison shouldn't be
things like VHS versus Betamax, but it should be more like horse
carriages versus motorcars.
And what to you base such an assertion on?
Would you care to elaborate on the technical
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
IAX really isn't the 'one and only' perfect signaling protocol because
many people forget one thing
IAX has one technical issue (by design) which makes it difficult to ever
get accepted by the big boys, a real big problem for carriers who have
big loads on their
Try travelling in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia, where
everything is still mostly dialup and many of the phone wires
installed go back before the time when plastic was invented.
So SIP doesn't work on dialup? That's funny 'cause I'm using it like that...
That's not what I said. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IAX really isn't the 'one and only' perfect signaling protocol
IAX is *not* a signalling protocol. It is a VoIP protocol.
And that's the whole point. H.323, SIP, et al those are all signalling
protocols, half protocols so to speak. IAX is a self-contained, true
- Non-Commercial Discussion
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far is IAX to be a Standard
Try travelling in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia, where
everything is still mostly dialup and many of the phone wires
installed go back
On Nov 1, 2004, at 9:37 PM, Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IAX really isn't the 'one and only' perfect signaling protocol
IAX is *not* a signalling protocol. It is a VoIP protocol.
And that's the whole point. H.323, SIP, et al those are all signalling
protocols,
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:55:40 -0500, Karl Brose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And what to you base such an assertion on?
Would you care to elaborate on the technical justifications?
In a nutshell: The future of voice will be peer-to-peer and that's
where IAX has a clear edge.
As for a technical
Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:
If you refer to the urban legend that IAX always needs a server to
stay in the media path, then you would be wrong. IAX has a mechanism
that for all practical purposes is equivalent to a SIP reinvite
through which the end points then transition to a mode
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:asterisk-users-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 12:53 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Re: How far
[snip]
A few weeks ago there was a statement from an open source
guru at an event making the mainstream news all over the
world and the statement was this: Watch out for Asterisk, it will be
bigger than Linux.
This wasn't coming from an Asterisk zealot driven by wishful
thinking. It was
40 matches
Mail list logo
