I don't think SIP should be bashed just of the NAT problems you guys are having. Not that IAX isn't an -exellent- protocoll for its uses, but SIP it a bit more than just p2p trunk VoIP.
F On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 21:48, Tilghman Lesher wrote: > On Wednesday 06 August 2003 02:27 pm, William Flanagan wrote: > > Why is this the case? Is it that it uses TCP? Is it the protocol? > > Is it that it works better through NATs? Is it just more mature > > than the SIP or MGCP implementation? What's the reason for it? A > > protocol is a protocol in my book. I'm trying to understand why > > the IAX protocol would work sooo much better. > > It might be because IAX was designed by an implementor (Mark), while > a protocol such as SIP was designed by committee. Problems that take > a committee 6 months and another 50 pages of revisions to correct are > fixed much more easily when the guy writing the protocol and the guy > writing the implementation are the same person. > > An old adage comes to mind: to find a group IQ, you take the lowest > IQ of any person in the group, then divide by the total number of > people. > > -Tilghman > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
