Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grab
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 18:47:32
Message-Id: 20160803214714.86f6c25df0445c38409d8434@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grab by Daniel Campbell
1 On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:10:45 -0700 Daniel Campbell wrote:
2 > On 08/03/2016 05:13 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
3 > > On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 08:58:24 -0300 Guilherme Amadio wrote:
4 > >> On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 11:15:30AM +0800, Jason Zaman wrote:
5 > >>> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:08:34PM -0700, Jigme Datse Rasku wrote:
6 > >>>> I'd have to say, there is likely a reason we are looking for a new
7 > >>>> maintainer. I don't know what is involved, but I might be interested.
8 > >>>> Might be wanting to start that direction...
9 > >>>
10 > >>> There is a new alpha skype for linux too now that should be looked into.
11 > >>> I have no idea how stable it is but it's probably not much worse than
12 > >>> what we currently have :P.
13 > >>>
14 > >>> https://community.skype.com/t5/Linux/Skype-for-Linux-Alpha-and-calling-on-Chrome-amp-Chromebooks/td-p/4434299
15 > >>
16 > >> There is also a web version at https://web.skype.com for those that feel
17 > >> that installing the desktop client is too much of a hassle. I've moved
18 > >> to Google Hangouts long ago, though, and never looked back.
19 > >
20 > > Lucky you... I also moved to sip and tox ages ago, but... there are
21 > > some people that use nothing but skype. That is the problem.
22 > >
23 > > Best regards,
24 > > Andrew Savchenko
25 > >
26 > Indeed. The network effect is unfortunately powerful. I think if Tox can
27 > get past a few key hurdles, adoption will be less of a hassle. All it
28 > needs is feature parity with video, voice, and file sharing. Of course,
29 > doing that with end-to-end encryption *and* with as little latency and
30 > bandwidth use as realistic is difficult.
31
32 There are more feature required: NAT traversal and restricted
33 firewall traversal. These may be irrelevant for most people in EU
34 or US, because they have white IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, but is
35 crucial for countries with limited numbers of IP's available and no
36 wide ipv6 support: most people here are behind the provider's NAT
37 and have no IPv6 (including myself).
38
39 And skype is damn good at this, it work even when both clients are
40 behind their NATs, udp is blocked and tcp is restricted to few
41 ports. SIP lacks here badly, clients need use either STUN (and it
42 doesn't always work) or VPN to SIP server, which is not always
43 provided and may be blocked as well. Tox is much better here: it
44 can workaround multiple NATs and some blocked ports, but video
45 becomes laggy :/
46
47 One more problem with tox: it is hard to sync accounts between
48 multiple hosts (e.g. desktop, laptop, phone): users have to sync
49 data themselves. Though skype is not perfect here either and have a
50 lot of bugs with syncing.
51
52 > But I try it out every now and then to see if I could convince my family
53 > to switch to it. In my experience people don't fully understand or value
54 > digital privacy until you explain to them what could be done with the
55 > structure of applications like Skype (going through a central server).
56 >
57 > If they ever reach the point of understanding that, it's easier to get
58 > them to simply try Tox or another alternative.
59
60 In my experience showing Mr. Snowden's docs makes a huge impression.
61 YMMW of course.
62
63 Best regards,
64 Andrew Savchenko