Paulo Scardine wrote: > thomas schorpp escreveu: >> bkml wrote: >> >>> Ken Rice wrote: >>> >>> >>>> If you don't want to use chan_sip there is always chan_woomera that >>>> uses >>>> opal which does sip and h323.... >>>> >>> woomera is exactly what has been proposed, maybe you want to read >>> the entire thread. >>> >> >> i dont think so. it would have been proposed to introduce a >> proprietary replacement for broad use. >> >> y >> tom >> > Please, IMHO you are barking to the wrong tree, it's an ALTERNATIVE (a > needed one), not a replacement.
history showed such things have been always replacements since M$ stole X-Windows and other stuff from MIT. > > I saw a developer politely asking if there would be interesting on some > alternative proprietary well-written SIP stack. how do You know "well-written" if closed source? > The answer is YES, there > are people who want this kind of support specially if bundled with the > patent encumbered codecs that will not make into callweaver any time > soon. stay on topic pls. codecs are not in a session initiation protocol (SIP). and we shouldn't give a shit on that U.S. lawyers trivial software patents bullshit. besides, the community has nearly always managed to give reverse-engineered and clean room designed replacements for codecs, since mp3 times. > For many people, callweaver will not be a viable alternative to > asterisk without this. Some folk will not buy the GNU-fundamentalist > "just make your provider use speex" argument. all my providers here use PCMA (G711a). just don't support providers restricting to unfree codecs at all. they stink like skype. > > I hope you have not scared the man. :-) he must take it. this sounds like censorship. > > Regards, > -- > Paulo > y tom _______________________________________________ Callweaver-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.callweaver.org/mailman/listinfo/callweaver-dev
