<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/the-sip-school/2008/08/ssimple-v-xmpp-debate-rumbles-on.html" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/the-sip-school/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2013:/the-sip-school//63/tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2008:/the-sip-school//63.37157-</id>
  <updated></updated>
  <title>Comments for SIP/SIMPLE v XMPP debate rumbles on</title>
  <subtitle>The SIP Blog is just that; with opinion and analysis on all things SIP in the world of VoIP</subtitle>
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.38</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2008:/the-sip-school//63.37157</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/the-sip-school/2008/08/ssimple-v-xmpp-debate-rumbles-on.html" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=63/entry_id=37157" title="SIP/SIMPLE v XMPP debate rumbles on" />
    <published>2008-08-08T07:47:53Z</published>
    <updated>2008-08-08T08:04:27Z</updated>
    <title>SIP/SIMPLE v XMPP debate rumbles on</title>
    <summary>So you are looking for a winner of the Instant Messaging protocol debate are you?&#160; Well, keep looking and maybe it will become clear over the coming years because XMPP has just gained another supporter, Yahoo. See this article on...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Graham Francis</name>
      <uri>http://www.thesipschool.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="The SIP Protocol" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/the-sip-school/">
      <![CDATA[So you are looking for a winner of the Instant Messaging protocol debate are you?&#160; Well, keep looking and maybe it will become clear over the coming years because XMPP has just gained another supporter, <a href="http://www.yahoo.com">Yahoo</a>. See this <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-9984673-93.html">article </a>on CNET.&#160; We think this is good for interoperability between other XMPP based services as no translation services&#160;would be&#160;needed - so <a href="http://www.google.com/talk">Google Talk</a> (also based on XMPP) should 'in theory' interoprate with whatever Yahoo do.&#160; So far so good.<br /><br />But what about SIP/SIMPLE?&#160; Well the <a href="http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/OLD/impp-charter.html">IMPP</a> working group came up with a Spec/Set of rules/whatever you want to call it (the CPP actually) that defines how IM protocols should map to each other so that 'islands' of IM systems don't have to stay as islands&#160;and SIP/SIMPLE&#160;/ XMPP systems can interoperate - just see what <a href="http://www.jabber.org/">Jabber</a> are up to to clarify this.<br /><br />So is SIP/SIMPLE doomed because Yahoo and Google may end up on each others buddy list?&#160; Well no, due to the fact that every Telecoms manufacturer I can think of (<a href="http://www.mitel.com">Mitel</a>, <a href="http://www.siemens.com">Siemens</a>, <a href="http://www.nortel.com">Nortel</a>, <a href="http://www.panasonic.com">Panasonic</a>, <a href="http://www.avaya.com">Avaya</a> etc. etc.) all use this protocol in their Unified Comms/Messaging products and are unlikely to switch.<br /><br />So for now, no winners just two big players who should play nicely together (Hopefully).]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

</feed>
