18 Feb
2005
18 Feb
'05
12:30 p.m.
Hi,
I have to side with Juha on this. A mandatory feature should be
released to the public. Moreover TLS IS a compelling need, for
everybody who cares, but with SER, we just cannot use it. Who would
not use TLS, was TLS available? Not all organizations have the money
or the will to spend money on a commercial license, eventhough it
would make them a lot of good.
And don't get me wrong, I understand why iptel choose this line of
"marketing" ... probably TLS is the most desired feature that free SER
lacks, so a lot of revenue comes from this side.
In any case, I would like to call all those developers out there with
some spare time who'd like to help implement TLS for free SER, myself
volunteering as of now (hope this email does not get censored :D ).
Drop me a line if you are interested.
Regards,
-Cesc---
At 10:27 PM 2/17/2005, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Marian Dumitru writes:
To be candid, the suggestion to release some of money-generating features
freely and begin working on some other money-generating feature is easier
said than executed.
Also you can go for TLS, which is as concept
basically the same thing
IPSEC tunnels. The major difference is that TLS is not free as IPSEC
is.
TLS not being part of free ser is indeed a problem. i think it is the
only feature mandated by rfc3261 that is not included in free ser.
i fully understand that iptel needs to make money somehow in order to
keep its developers on the payroll, but i feel that a mandatory feature
should not be hold back. there still is plenty of other value add that
iptel can produce even if tls would be in public domain. so what can be done about it? the easiest thing would,
of course, be
that iptel changes its policy and makes their tls implementation as part
of free ser.
I do not see that as feasible, at least not at short-term. The feature
is commercially available to those with a compelling need for it.
-jiri