Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu - Can XMPP and SIP be complementary? (was Call Notes - 2/16)

Subject: SIP in higher education

List archive

Can XMPP and SIP be complementary? (was Call Notes - 2/16)

Chronological Thread 
  • From: Deke Kassabian <>
  • To: ,
  • Subject: Can XMPP and SIP be complementary? (was Call Notes - 2/16)
  • Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 14:18:59 -0500

Bill Reid wrote:
Here is an article talking about SIP, SIMPLE, XMPP and RTP. [...]

"In contrast to popular perceptions, RTP, XMPP, and SIP are quite
complementary and provide the basis for a complete solution to
real-time communication needs."

Christian Schlatter
This article suggests that SIP should be used for voice/video and
XMPP for IM&P. I see the following problems with this approach:

- SIP and XMPP use different address formats, which would introduce
the hassle of having one address for voice/video and one for IM&P

Yes, I certainly agree that that doesn't seem ideal.

- clients would have to implement two RTC stacks, achieving
interoperability between implementations would be more difficult

Another good point. I guess that means a developer that wants to provide a client with an integrated experience based on XMPP IM&P and SIP voice would, essentially, be writing two clients with one GUI. Is that about right?

- SIP and XMPP use their own authentication protocols, so there
would be
the need for single sign-on (same username/pwd for SIP/XMPP)

Is it reasonable to think of this as similar to my mail user agent having to authenticate to smtp servers, imap servers, and ldap servers? In that case, authentication may involve 1, 2 or 3 servers and perhaps as many sets of credentials. It makes for some config and UA complexity, to be sure. But generally, it is manageable.

Is this similar?

Deke Kassabian, Senior Technology Director
Information Systems and Computing, University of Pennsylvania

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page