IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tools-discuss] webex/webrtc

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 14 February 2017 21:34 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F4B129525 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ki9eut6vGkWF for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A2341294CF for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:34:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B602200A3 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:55:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978636381A for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:34:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <9A249B84-E693-4273-9688-0CD7AB26D5F2@fugue.com>
References: <25691.1487081051@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <9A249B84-E693-4273-9688-0CD7AB26D5F2@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:34:29 -0500
Message-ID: <31317.1487108069@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/3GJKMqdiS0RXIjMEiLY7TgXahAE>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] webex/webrtc
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:34:37 -0000

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
    > - since we have no clear SLA, maybe we should just
    > do our own thing? (JITSI?)


    > This seems straightforwardly obvious. The only obstacle is that some
    > corporate firewalls seem to prevent people from using it.

Most of those people are screwed trying to do VoIP audio with webex as well,
and they simply dial in.

But the screen sharing mechanisms sometimes still works for for them if they
have a platform with the approved version of JAVA (usually, not
unfortunately, a known-to-be secure version of java).

So that seems to me, to the be killer problem with JITSI: no dial in available.

The webrtc version of webex worked really really well for me, btw.
If it would remain, I'd stop yelling cross-platform dogfood.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email