Re: [Simple] SIMPLE and OMA and 3Gpp and RCS and… (new subject)

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Fri, 02 November 2012 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.com>
X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A599F21F89DF for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.122, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rHPl399Da6lh for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node06.dns-hosting.info [85.17.186.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B102D21F89DA for <simple@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id C38D5B35DC; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 16:53:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from imac.saghul.lan (ip3e830637.speed.planet.nl [62.131.6.55]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBD1FB007E; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 16:53:47 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <5093EAB0.30909@jitsi.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:53:47 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <406B58B9-42EC-4070-ACCC-D364ADE218CB@ag-projects.com>
References: <axjp925efdvel8fmpey6jc73.1351800528451@email.android.com> <E0C42E85-1C67-435E-BCB8-F8F980DD9FE4@edvina.net> <2C9DA935-CBBD-4DCF-A2A4-FF0139FB62B2@ag-projects.com> <CALiegfmBNCTxcK0ZVdWXToDsYLWgtp9vyprt6Yj0_C=81yFWQQ@mail.gmail.com> <4BB9B7CC-7866-4406-BE3B-20A266D34E53@ag-projects.com> <CALiegfmmbOtw6TLfMd5AS2iQLr1maxKi+8tjnaoDa9OQB8SxaQ@mail.gmail.com> <F07738BF-C267-43B6-BC5D-F129C95718AD@ag-projects.com> <CALiegfkpeRhQW=tJpy3A8q0-KG8dWs=in9WFmOnkBYEi7DyZ_Q@mail.gmail.com> <52C2C109-CFBD-4577-AF63-E36F82F6A809@nostrum.com> <5093EAB0.30909@jitsi.org>
To: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>, "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, "simple@ietf.org" <simple@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Simple] SIMPLE and OMA and 3Gpp and RCS and… (new subject)
X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions <simple.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/simple>
List-Post: <mailto:simple@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:53:50 -0000

On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:45 PM, Emil Ivov wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> Since it's rant time ...
> 
> On 02.11.12, 15:20, Ben Campbell wrote:
>> (as individual)
>> 
>> On Nov 2, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> I'd love to see a better model endorsed by SIMPLE and then
>>>> happily implement it. I think we do share this goal :-)
>>> 
>>> Sure we agree here. The key is: reusing SIMPLE/XCAP specs? or
>>> making something better from scratch (after learning from current
>>> SIMPLE/XMPP specs)?
>> 
>> Do you really believe nothing is salvageable? For example, would you
>> jettison all of the below?
>> 
>> -- Using SIP in the first place -- SIP Events -- RLS -- SIP Message 
>> -- MSRP -- XCAP -- etc
> 
> I've never really understood how one could justify the use of a
> completely different protocol to send IMs ... as if SIP was not complex
> and evolved enough to handle this. And then that new protocols is just
> so awesome that one can't have different chat sessions with different
> people unless they setup different connections/sockets for every
> conversation. Seriously?
> 

If memory serves correctly, you could stay connected with your relay and send all sessions through it, since session multiplexing over a single TCP connection is supported.

> Then, because the above was clearly not fun enough, we add yet another
> completely different protocol for storing contacts lists.
> 
> I don't know the history but the result is just way beyond my understanding.
> 
> XMPP, MSN, Yahoo! Messenger, Gadu-Gadu, ICQ, AIM (before and after they
> converged in OSCAR), Skype, they all managed to handle IM, presence and
> contact storage with a single protocol.
> 
> SIP needed three.
> 

Very good point.

> Today those are implemented within different server-side applications
> that then need to be deployed together. They need to be configured to
> share user bases and policies. This hinders deployment and .. well ...
> almost no one does it.
> 
> If there's a remake then could we please consider consolidating the
> whole thing?
> 
>>> From the discussions so far, it sounds like most of the complaints
>>> are in the area of reusing user lists between clients (e.g. contact
>>> lists, presence rules, etc). Do people really hate the entire
>>> SIMPLE suite, or is it just an XCAP issue.
>> 
>> If the scope of the work is "start over from scratch", then it seems
>> like we would be better served starting with XMPP. 
> 
> We've seen relative ease of adoption with solutions of this kind:
> 
> draft-ivov-xmpp-cusax
> 
> I am by no means insisting that a similar model has to be adopted by a
> SIMPLE successor but it has to be at least that easy to deploy.
> Preferably easier.
> 

Thanks for your input Emil!


Regards,

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects