Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3

[Peter Musgrave <[e-mail]>]

Yeah. Sigh.

I guess the issue then becomes whether this is enough of a step in right
direction that it can be built on - and whether it's worth the effort.

Cullen/Jonathan - can you speak to any of the operational issues w.r.t.
'failure surprise' in the existing implementation?

Regards,

Peter Musgrave

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  On 7/6/10 7:20 AM, Peter Musgrave wrote:
>
>> From my perspective what this is really about is the ability for me to
>> have interoperable ad-hoc video calls between businesses which can be
>> established via SIP with a "good enough" level of authentication and
>> security.
>>
>
>
> You're looking in the wrong place, then.
>
> The problem is that VIPR really provides something more like "random
> failure surprise," as some portion of the call attempts must go over the
> (non-video-capable) PSTN. The user doesn't have any idea about, or control
> over, when this will happen. So while it might be something you could use
> for personal purposes -- where frequent video call setup failures would be
> okay -- I doubt it's a viable video solution in a business environment. To
> run a business, you need something better than "random failure surprise".
>
> /a
>