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
18 Feb
18 Feb
9:17 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] how to get TLS into free part of ser?
I would like to have TLS freely available too. I have been trying to
push in that direction for a while, so far without success.
Jan.
On 18-02 11:30, Cesc Santasusana wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers 
9:15 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] how to get TLS into free part of ser?
TLS in the Free version of Ser would be nice :D
-Atle
* Jan Janak <jan(a)iptel.org> [050218 20:04]:
I would like to have TLS freely available too. I have
been trying to
push in that direction for a while, so far without success.
Jan.
On 18-02 11:30, Cesc Santasusana wrote:
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:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
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
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers 
19 Feb
19 Feb
1:06 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] how to get TLS into free part of ser?
Jan Janak writes:
I would like to have TLS freely available too. I have
been trying to
push in that direction for a while, so far without success.
jan, thanks for your support on this.
i would like to add that it would be interesting to know which parts of
the free code iptel has its own versions, so that other developers know
when they are more or less "on their own".
like parser, for example, does iptel use its own version of parser
because i didn't find in the free parser any ifdefs referring to sips
uris or tls.
-- juha
1:19 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] how to get TLS into free part of ser?
Juha Heinanen writes:
like parser, for example, does iptel use its own
version of parser
because i didn't find in the free parser any ifdefs referring to sips
uris or tls.
andrei already replied to this. the parser DOES support sips uris,
which is a good thing. many modules, however, just assume that uri
scheme is sip and all those would need to be fixed to check the security
or, preferably, uri_scheme field. i guess many module writers were not
aware of this issue.
i'll check the modules that i have written for sip: dependencies and
hope others do the same.
-- juha
7218
days inactive
7218
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Atle Samuelsen -
Cesc Santasusana -
Jan Janak -
Juha Heinanen