[kwlug-disc] Dump skype on Monday night

[unsolicited]

I suspect it may have nothing to do with the LOL-security.

IIRC, wi-fi does not (always?) act the way a hard-wired switch does.

I would be surprised if Paul put in restrictions between wi-fi 
clients. [At time of configuration, it would be an easy expectation 
that there would be times when clients would need to ssh or http in to 
another computer for demo purposes.] I would also be surprised if he 
has any ability to do so. (Between wi-fi and wired, yes, and either to 
out, or from/in.) Any routers I've come across deal with the hard 
ports or the wi-fi as a switch, wherein (a) no boundary is crossed and 
thus no opportunity to apply a rule; (b) inter-port traffic is dealt 
with at a hardware level - the software interface never even sees the 
traffic.

It would be interesting to know if you were able to ssh or http one 
another in that instance.

It would also be interesting to know if you had connected a cross-over 
cable between the two of you if it all just worked.

Two sip clients should have been able to connect directly to each 
other. Assuming calling correct ip / ports, and no local firewall / 
iptables issues.

Did you happen to try (cough) if Skype worked?

gtalk?

Bob Jonkman wrote, On 06/08/2011 12:00 AM:
> Well, John Kerr and I tried to use SIP softphones, but it seems the 
> LOL-security was just too strict.
> 
> I was using the Linphone client with my Ekiga account ( 
> BobJonkman at ekiga.net ), and could make an out-bound call to the Ekiga 
> callback test number ( sip:520 at ekiga.net ) but could not receive the 
> callback.
> 
> John and I tried to make a peer-to-peer connection, but that was also 
> unsuccessful.  Perhaps the softphones need to make contact with a server 
> before handing off in a p2p session.
> 
> Joe Wennechuk pointed out that if I had set up a VPN to my home server I 
> would have had the equivalent of a client outside the LOL-security zone, 
> and John might have been able to connect to me.  Maybe next time...
> 
> --Bob.
> 
> 
> On 2011-06-07 at 23:53:36  Jason Locklin wrote:
>>> Steven Blatchford wrote, On 06/06/2011 3:02 PM:
>>>>> Perhaps dumb questions, but:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. There are Skype alternatives?
>>>>> - for the moment, let's ignore the client and talk about the backbone.
>>>>> - i.e. To Khalid's point, presumably the alternative has to have a
>>>>> solid, wide-ranging presence - if we're to convince those we talk to
>>>>> to consider trying the alternative. What might they be - google?
>>>>> (Given Android?)
>> Skype alternatives? Yes, of course. Skype is just VOIP combined with an
>> instant-message type phone book. The two general types of competitors
>> are SIP clients that combine with other IM networks to achieve the same
>> effect, or XMPP/Jabber clients that use the Jingle protocol to create
>> VOIP calls. Of course SIP clients can integrate well with PBX's and
>> ATA's, while Jingle VOIP users can communicate with GTalk and even
>> Googles Gmail-based VOIP chat.
>>
>> Of course, any client that is not as capable as Skype at recklessly
>> punching holes through crappy, restricted NAT routers is a non-starter.
>> Additionally, the ability to create peer-to-peer connections instead of
>> always using a proxy for NAT (i.e., ICE), can drastically improve call
>> quality. In effect, Skype seems to always work, even on the most
>> restrictive of networks, and at the same time, manages to find a direct
>> peer-to-peer connection if at all possible. An alternative needs to be
>> able to do the same or better.
>>
>> Cross-platform examples I like:
>> Blink. SIP with IM.  http://icanblink.com/
>> Jitsi (sip-communicator). Multi protocol including SIP and XMPP
>> http://www.jitsi.org/
>> Empathy/Telepathy is convenient on Gnome, but lacks a lot of features
>> and defaults to a low-quality audio codec.
>>
>>
>>>>> 2. Why switch from Skype?
>>>>> - I get that MS has purchased Skype - have there been any intimations
>>>>> or news of 'nefariousness'?
>> Proprietary and jealously closed network. Anyone interested in continued
>> innovation in internet based voice communication should support any move
>> away from such a network. There is a reason that despite Skype having
>> 100's of times more users, there are many more companies developing
>> products (hardware and software) for SIP based communication.
>>
>> I can never manage make it out to meetings (3 young children at home),
>> but am happy to help experiment if anyone is trying to figure out what
>> works best over a variety of network situations.
>>
>> _
>> Jason
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> kwlug-disc mailing list
>> kwlug-disc at kwlug.org
>> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc mailing list
> kwlug-disc at kwlug.org
> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>