5 ms·

As of now we have no plan to support Tox. We initially evaluated this and decided against. Ring is based on open standards such as SIP (rfc3261), TLSv1.2 (rfc52

by Elv13 11y ago

As of now we have no plan to support Tox. We initially evaluated this and decided against. Ring is based on open standards such as SIP (rfc3261), TLSv1.2 (rfc5246), SRTP (rfc3711), vCards (rfc6350) and many more. We are also inter-operable with existing SIP infrastructure such as corporate phone system and classical phone provider with optional SIP accounts. We will continue to be as standard compliant as we can rather than create/support yet another custom communication protocol. What Ring bring to this existing mesh of technologies is the ability to connect people using a decentralized peer-to-peer network.

madez 11y ago
Support for non-obsolete and secure standardized protocols seems to me to be a good thing. As of now we have no plan to support Tox. We initially evaluated this and decided against. I'm rather interested in the reasons of this decision. Ring is based on open standards (...). Tox is open as well. However, I see a difference between the protocols you've given and Tox: Tox is not standardized. What Ring bring to this existing mesh of technologies is the ability to connect people using a decentralized peer-to-peer network. This technology for peer-to-peer discovery is also not standardized, I assume. So, why creating your own protocol instead of using Tox for this?
- Elv13 11y ago
  > This technology for peer-to-peer discovery is also not standardized, I assume. DHT has been used in the wild for more than a decade now, it is very well understood. SIP over DHT idea has also been studied[1] academically for a long period of time, even if it was never really implemented in commercial products. Finally, our P2P "protocol" is still using the standards mentioned above for cryptographic identity and other negotiation details, so there is very little that isn't fully standard. [1] Example: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.183.4313&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.183... (not used for the current Ring implementation)
  - madez 11y ago
    DHT has been used in the wild for more than a decade now, it is very well understood. Tox also uses DHT for contact discovery [1]. Does Ring support communication without having to register any type of account on any third-party server? [1]: https://jenkins.libtoxcore.so/job/Technical_Report/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tox.pdf/ https://jenkins.libtoxcore.so/job/Technical_Report/lastSucce...
    - Elv13 11y ago
      No server account are required, it is what DHT is for. However, if you do have a server SIP account, we also support them. This is all about interoperability with existing infrastructure.
      - madez 11y ago
        I see value in the support of server accounts. However, the DHT-based account-less p2p part seems to redoing work Tox has done. Why not use their efforts and experience? They offer their core separately and Ring could be a client for it.
        Elv13 11y ago
        That would duplicate most of our code and we chose not to do so. We currently have an unified architecture that handle both existing sip infrastructure and the distributed one. The distributed part is less or more done, it isn't a big part of the code (about 4% according to a quick rexgex) compared to SIP. We currently use an open network model, but will switch to a closed one based on the cryptographic chain of trust in the coming weeks. That about all there is to it, everything else is SIP/ICE/UPnP/TLS/RTP.
        madez 11y ago
        That would duplicate most of our code You wouldn't have had to write that code if using Tox were chosen in the first place. will switch to a closed one based on the cryptographic chain of trust This could differentiate the decentralized part of Ring from Tox. Can you give more details on this? Anyway, I still think you should try to join efforts.

by Elv13 11y ago

madez 11y ago

Support for non-obsolete and secure standardized protocols seems to me to be a good thing. As of now we have no plan to support Tox. We initially evaluated this and decided against. I'm rather interested in the reasons of this decision. Ring is based on open standards (...). Tox is open as well. However, I see a difference between the protocols you've given and Tox: Tox is not standardized. What Ring bring to this existing mesh of technologies is the ability to connect people using a decentralized peer-to-peer network. This technology for peer-to-peer discovery is also not standardized, I assume. So, why creating your own protocol instead of using Tox for this?

Elv13 11y ago
> This technology for peer-to-peer discovery is also not standardized, I assume. DHT has been used in the wild for more than a decade now, it is very well understood. SIP over DHT idea has also been studied[1] academically for a long period of time, even if it was never really implemented in commercial products. Finally, our P2P "protocol" is still using the standards mentioned above for cryptographic identity and other negotiation details, so there is very little that isn't fully standard. [1] Example: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.183.4313&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.183... (not used for the current Ring implementation)
- madez 11y ago
  DHT has been used in the wild for more than a decade now, it is very well understood. Tox also uses DHT for contact discovery [1]. Does Ring support communication without having to register any type of account on any third-party server? [1]: https://jenkins.libtoxcore.so/job/Technical_Report/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tox.pdf/ https://jenkins.libtoxcore.so/job/Technical_Report/lastSucce...
  - Elv13 11y ago
    No server account are required, it is what DHT is for. However, if you do have a server SIP account, we also support them. This is all about interoperability with existing infrastructure.
    - madez 11y ago
      I see value in the support of server accounts. However, the DHT-based account-less p2p part seems to redoing work Tox has done. Why not use their efforts and experience? They offer their core separately and Ring could be a client for it.
      - Elv13 11y ago
        That would duplicate most of our code and we chose not to do so. We currently have an unified architecture that handle both existing sip infrastructure and the distributed one. The distributed part is less or more done, it isn't a big part of the code (about 4% according to a quick rexgex) compared to SIP. We currently use an open network model, but will switch to a closed one based on the cryptographic chain of trust in the coming weeks. That about all there is to it, everything else is SIP/ICE/UPnP/TLS/RTP.
        madez 11y ago
        That would duplicate most of our code You wouldn't have had to write that code if using Tox were chosen in the first place. will switch to a closed one based on the cryptographic chain of trust This could differentiate the decentralized part of Ring from Tox. Can you give more details on this? Anyway, I still think you should try to join efforts.