Slashdot Mirror
Google, Jabber, and Jingle
An anonymous reader writes "Jabber has published the experimental draft Jingle specs, which extend XMPP for use in voice over IP (VoIP), video, and other peer-to-peer multimedia sessions.
Google released an open-source library called 'Libjingle' on SourceForge. Libjingle is a set of components provided by Google that let your programs interoperate with Google Talk's peer-to-peer and voice calling capabilities. The package includes source code for Google's implementation of Jingle and Jingle-Audio."
I'm not fat, just big boned...
Now if google would just implement server-to-server jabber connections, this might be useful!
That's why Google hasn't opted to add Server-to-Server communication yet; if you're on their server, they can kick your ass off and ban you, but coming from other servers it's a lot more difficult to regulate (and I'm sure they've got someone working on it with their 20% free time).
As for the person who said it sounds like BS being named "Jingle"; A lot of people say "I'll give you a ring" as a way of saying they'll call you later. Thus, Jingle (a ringing sound).
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Good for you! Meanwhile, for the rest of us who aren't paranoid/Google-bashers, this is a boon, including Jabber users (you know, this will work for your Jabber server too, right? ;)
Besides, Google hasn't implemented Server-to-Server communication yet for reasons posted elseware in this very article; they don't want spam. It's harder to validate posts coming from offserver without actually reading them, which would breech your privacy, right? (On server they have the option of reading it [via EULA], post rate limiting, banning accounts, etc)
So please, next time Google (or $BIG_COMPANY) gives the open source world a donation and a piece of code it's been needing for a while now, take it as a gift, and try not to be so critical about it. Thanks.
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Of all the people to have a broken link... Did anyone else try the "Home Page" link on the SF project description?
There's an old saying that says pretty much whatever you want it to.
I better lock the door before my pointy haired boss comes in: "This looks interesting. I want VoIP before you can go home for Christmas."
Insert `fortune -o` here
All these instant messagers and voice applications could somehow communicate so would not need to have so many on my computer. Even if the communication was on lowest common denominator, could use the ones I like and atleast communicate somehow with people using others.. oh well.. not likely to happen soon I guess.
The 20% idea is for, like you said, free time. I think you are right, that they will work on some sort of spam control for third-party server's, but it will be an 80% project, something the company assigns, not a free time project.
Though, having a preference that says a user will only accept (or be bothered with requests from) user's already in their buddy list would seem to solve this for the most part. These settings have been around for years (on AIM, atleast, where you can have only Buddy List members IM you, as a form of spam/parental control).
Psi, one of the most popular Jabber clients out there has announced that they are working on support for jingle. http://psi-im.org/forum/post/24491
Instant packet network protocol (instant message) vs. Delayed message network protocol (email); apples to oranges comparison.
Google has a HUGE database of spam emails to compare a suspect email to; doing the same with Instant Messages would instantly through privacy nuts into convolutions (much like gmail did when it started; ZOMG GOOGLES READING MY IMZ), but is entirely possible to do. So it's not far-fetched that they use a similar system, but it's a lot more work to convince people to use this system.
A better solution would be to find a way to keep spam from coming in without reading the IMs in the first place. But, if I had an answer to that problem, I would be working for Google. You could opt for encryption, but as soon as an encrypted spammer arrived, you'd be up shit's creek even further than you are now (as decrypting someone's IMs would be even worse for Google PR). So for now, Google's opted to keep its doors closed to the public, and that's just fine. Don't like it? Go use another Instant Messaging protocol which means you have to go through someone elses server anyways. But the way I look at it is "I trust Google more than I trust Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL combined; I'd rather use Google's service".
PS: (Oh, and if you think running your own Jabber server is a way around it, what do you think happens when you want to message someone off server? That's right, your message goes through someone elses server. That means they could be spying on you! Oh noes! To tell you the honest truth, I'd rather have the security in numbers of a huge company's client, then chancing my message through someone's private server; the huge company's more likely to have a lot more imporant things on its mind than reading people's IMs...)
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Spam? on Jabber? This is news to me.
Jabber has built in anti spam. In order for me to talk to you, I have to ask you if I can, and then you have to tell me that it's OK. This is part of the Jabber protocol itself. Google Talk has no reason not to turn on server-to-server connectivity. They're limiting their usefulness by leaving it off. I really do wish they would turn it on because I already run my own Jabber server, and my Jabber ID is the same as my email address. I'm confident that gaim will support Jingle soon, so all Google needs to do is enable s2s support and I can completely ditch AOL IM and stop signing into Google Talk.
I want to ditch AOL IM because lately AOL IM has turned to crap, with their auth-servers (the servers that verify your screen name and password) successfully authenticating me, and then redirecting me to a chat server (commonly known as a BOS server) that is dead. Dead as a doorknob. -ECONNREFUSED. And if I mash reconnect enough times while they continue to direct me to a broken chat server, they put a ban on me for trying to sign in!
da w00t. mtfnpy?
IM clients are the obviousplace to strapon VOIP communication. The jabber system would be a perfect VOIP framework. Your "number" will simply be your JabberID. Which is similar to an email address, so it's easy to remember.
You'll simply dial something like "malda@slashdot.org" to complain to Taco about the preponderance of dupes, and Taco can simply add your address "slashbot@cheapisp.com" to his ignore list.
If telemarketers become a problem, some kind of del.ico.us system might enable VOIP users to share a list of banned domains or addresses. Potential for abuse etc, etc.
Key point here is that a system based on "email" like addresses would be batter and easier to remember than the current telecoms number based system.
May the Maths Be with you!
Jabber has built in anti spam. In order for me to talk to you, I have to ask you if I can, and then you have to tell me that it's OK.
N ET would like to talk to you.
CHECK.IT.OUT.PENIS.ENLARGMENT.CHEAP@BIGGER-PENIS.