On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:37:21 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For IRC in general I would like to use something graphical, but
> sometimes I only have ssh, so I've only been using irssi in screen or
> tmux so far.
ssh is exactly one of the reason why ncurses makes sense.
If you design a clie
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:11:47 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> does it show anywhere the rtp stream setup process including the
> hole-punching?
Not in the wiki sadly. Read the code.
--
FRIGN
> IRC client <-> bitlbee <-> tox
Ah, so no voice over DCC. But I still don't like my IRC client, so I
don't know why you see value in that.
Anything interesting on top of sic or ii?
For IRC in general I would like to use something graphical, but
sometimes I only have ssh, so I've only been
>> XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
>> you want...
>
> Dude, I have an epiphany right now ... XML, XSLT, X11,
Not to take all the credit: learned about the X principle somewhere on
cat-v.org (couldn't find it right now).
Greetings.
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:11:10 +0100 hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is not a client for a mass market, but the masses can’t be saved.
> Then who are you going to talk to?
All the people via compatibility layers.
> > voice/video via DCC
> Does it work behind NATs. Why is DCC s
> Regarding the RTP stream, it's transported via UDP[0] (as usual).
does it show anywhere the rtp stream setup process including the hole-punching?
On March 24, 2014 12:20:49 PM CET, FRIGN wrote:
>Dude, I have an epiphany right now ... XML, XSLT, X11,
x86
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 13:20:15 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure, most DHT implementations work perfectly for signalling, as long
> as there are enough people without NAT helping out. But I don't see
> anything about the actual rtp stream there. Does it get sent over DHT,
> too? I see that
>> I would still want the application to fall back to using a proxy if
>> all hole-punching attempts failed. And what sadly is not obvious to
>> the implementers: I would want the applications to DETECT that it
>> failed, i.e. when there's no rtp packet for a second you send out some
>> standard SI
> I'm bored of discussing XMPP+SIP to be honest, when there are more
> interesting things like Tox in the making ;).
luckily for you the single implementations in either category differ
far more than the protocols+extensions.
> Have you checked retroshare?
they don't even list udp hole-punching,
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:15:25 +0100
Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Just look at how it’s done in bitlbee. You have the tox account and
> there are users you open queries to. Just look at how different IRC can
> be represented in pidgin and regular IRC clients like irssi. So it
Greetings.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:15:25 +0100 FRIGN wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100
> Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>
> > I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> > IRC clients. Add video support to them using SDCC and you are set. All
>
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100
Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> IRC clients. Add video support to them using SDCC and you are set. All
> of these problems have been there before. Reuse what’s being used
* Christoph Lohmann 2014-03-24 14:59
> I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> IRC clients.
+1
then you don't impose a particular interaction scheme on everyone.
--s_
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 14:42
> On topic, I would like to know how you would implement a chat client on
> the terminal. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is all for a ii-like interface, but
> I'd be really glad to hear more opinions on that.
Here you are: I'm fine with ii
> We can definitely look at things only wit
Greetings.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100 FRIGN wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:09:14 +0100
> sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
>
> On topic, I would like to know how you would implement a chat client on
> the terminal. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is all for a ii-like interface, but
> I'd be really glad
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 07:29:54 -0600
Joshua Haase wrote:
> Have you checked retroshare? The GUI they bundle is quite bloated but I
> think it's library could be an alternative that does this. They say it's
> direct p2p connection and have VoIP. Haven't checked the code though.
Retroshare adresses
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:09:14 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> While I'd love to see a distributed system which comes with all benefits
> of decentralisation -- flexibility, dependability, hard to compromise,
> etc. --, I am not aware of any, so one such needs to be first
> implemented, then p
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> writes:
> XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
> you want...
>
> I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
> connections for the voice stream without any third server in the
> middle.
Have you checked retroshare?
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 12:31
> > http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
> Looks like your mail went through a meat grinder.
why? something wrong with the link? but you got there if you are citing
the video description? sorry, don't get it. It was as offtopic as it
gets anyway.
--s_
Just to make two things clear: I'm not an expert in XMPP and SIP. The
video came to my mind as I read the X argument: couldn't resist to post
it. First time I saw it I spent quite some time to figure out whether
it is fake. Ever since I love it.
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 12:56
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:3
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:36:36 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> In general, the XMPP + SIP solution makes sense to me. And since XMPP
> will be around for some time, I guess, it does not require people to get
> yet another account, i.e. it has the potential to be easily adopted
Still, XMPP is
* Nick 2014-03-24 00:01
> Indeed I'm using Jitsi at the moment, despite the fact that it's in
> Java and has an interface that you'd expect for that. But it works,
> and is quite secure over the wire, and that counts for a great deal.
Same here. I managed to force the parties I have video chat o
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:17:16 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> which is clearly due to S
> http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
>
> (SCNR!)
>
> --s_
>
Looks like your mail went through a meat grinder.
To quote the video-description:
"Because it's all part of Barak Osama Homo bin Laden's plot to i
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 11:38:52 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
> you want...
Dude, I have an epiphany right now ... XML, XSLT, X11,
> I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
> connectio
* hiro 2014-03-24 11:39
> and SIP also has it's complexities
which is clearly due to S
http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
(SCNR!)
--s_
XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
you want...
I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
connections for the voice stream without any third server in the
middle.
Do you know of any skype-competition that correctly implements 2-way
UDP
FRIGN said:
> Well I looked into SIP a few months ago and couldn't become a fan of
> it.
Can you please go in more detail about SIP? I looked into it some time
ago, and (apart from several ugly XML-based extensions) it seemed fine.
I actually use baresip[0] – a small command line client with aud
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:22:27 -0400
Caleb Malchik wrote:
> After seeing Jacob Appelbaum's speech this morning beamed from Berlin to
> Boston via a conglomeration of Jitsi, Tor, and other tools, it's great to
> see work being done on a sane base to address this need. A suckless
> client is definite
After seeing Jacob Appelbaum's speech this morning beamed from Berlin to
Boston via a conglomeration of Jitsi, Tor, and other tools, it's great to
see work being done on a sane base to address this need. A suckless
client is definitely something I could get behind.
Caleb
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 18:55:25 -0400
Nick wrote:
Hey Nick,
thanks for your reply.
> linphone provides a cli client. I used it for a little while. It's
> kind of annoying, but probably less so than the GTK version.
Well I looked into SIP a few months ago and couldn't become a fan of
it.
However,
Hi FRIGN,
Just a quick reply for now.
> 4) *VoIP* on the terminal. I know of no CLI-IM-client implementing
>VoIP-facilities when the protocol offers it.
linphone provides a cli client. I used it for a little while. It's
kind of annoying, but probably less so than the GTK version.
The Tox w
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 21:33:29 +0100
FRIGN wrote:
> [0]: https://github.com/nurupo/ProjectTox-Qt-GUI
Of course, this should be
[0]: http://tox.im/ / https://github.com/irungentoo/ProjectTox-Core
--
FRIGN
Good evening fellow hackers,
the Tox-project[0] has recently come to my attention and I'd really
like to share it with you, as it is a project housing a great potential
to finally replace Skype for all your IM, VoIP and MoIP needs.
For everyone who is not yet familiar with it:
tox-core provides a
34 matches
Mail list logo
