• jabjoe@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Can’t they invest in standardized SIP solutions? Linphone is already French.

      • jabjoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        It could be improve. SMB3 is far better for firewalling than SMB1/2.

        A standard audio/video call protocol is great to have and SIP is everywhere already. Already supports video though this isn’t as widely used.

        It could be iterated.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      SIP uses different signalling protocols amongst other things than WebRTC, and i imagine browser support is a hard requirement

      • jabjoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I know of a few things that do a WebRTC interface for SIP. So you can make SIP calls from your webbrowser.

        • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          yes but you need a server in the middle which is just a huge waste of resources when you could just use webrtc with basically no down side

            • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              to use SIP, in a web browser, you need to use wrapper of some kind (probably WebRTC-based)… you can not directly use SIP in a web browser. given that web browsers are likely a hard requirement, it makes no sense to use 2 separate standards

              SIP is the wrong choice for this project, and any greenfield project wishing to integrate web browsers with no hard requirement to support SIP devices

              • jabjoe@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 hours ago

                SIP is what we have right now for VOIP. If you can connect to SIP, you can literally ring people over the current system. Audio only of course. Backwards compatibly is worth a lot. If they are also SIP, you should be able to do video. The providers I know are using WebRTC for a browser SIP client basically. Baresip has this as an example module, but there is commercial software that also does this. Avoid having to a local SIP client installed.

                Backwards compatible laying for the win. Much easier to replace things that way.

                • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  these are different problems now though… sure you can make calls to existing VOIP endpoints and PSTN devices, but that’s not what they’re trying to implement: they’re trying to implement group video conferencing, which WebRTC was built for

                  • jabjoe@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 hours ago

                    I think that’s probably it. Their scope is limited. They are only wanting to replaced Teams, Meet and Zoom. Which their are a few open, self-hostable, alternatives already. I want a scope to cover WhatsApp and Signal, while being backwards compatible to just make regular phones calls when nothing better is available.