If LAN is legacy, what is the UN-legacy...?
-
@Dashrender The economy of scale thing is what I meant by the p2p complexity tax being "regressive" in my presentation on firewalls. The bigger you are, the less it costs to either invest in the engineering required to do p2p well or just back-haul everything to the cloud. If (like MS) you own a bunch of your own data centers, then putting all traffic through your cloud is very cheap due to the scale you already have. So the cloud back-haul requirement intrinsically favors large vendors.
Personally I think Skype going central was just the MS economy of scale thing. You can do P2P on mobile-- ZeroTier has an Android app and soon an iOS one and they work fine. My phone is always pingable on our company LAN and the impact on battery life is in the fractions of a percent. Of course maybe that's more true today... Skype ported to mobile back when phones had slower single-core CPUs and smaller batteries. Radios have quietly gotten way more efficient too, so the constant low-grade peer-to-peer packet slinging doesn't eat as much battery as it might have with earlier generation LTE and WiFi chipsets.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
As far as the feds telling Skype to centralize: I personally doubt this and have always heard it was because they found p2p too hard on mobile. Another reason is they were bought by Microsoft. Centralization's cost decreases exponentially if you already own data centers. It's an economy of scale. So once MS bought them the economic incentive to decentralize was gone and centralization is a more standard way of doing things that more coders understand and it does make some problems simpler.
And MS had to change how it worked for the merge into Lync. It's that Skype was phased out is really what happened, not that it changed.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
Personally I think Skype going central was just the MS economy of scale thing. You can do P2P on mobile-- ZeroTier has an Android app and soon an iOS one and they work fine. My phone is always pingable on our company LAN and the impact on battery life is in the fractions of a percent. Of course maybe that's more true today... Skype ported to mobile back when phones had slower single-core CPUs and smaller batteries. Radios have quietly gotten way more efficient too, so the constant low-grade peer-to-peer packet slinging doesn't eat as much battery as it might have with earlier generation LTE and WiFi chipsets.
I'm extremely interesting in the ZeroTier on PBX concept. Hoping to test that in the sooner than later time frame. Would be nice to have laptops and cell phones talking to a PBX over ZT rather than some more cumbersome mechanism.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@adam.ierymenko said:
Personally I think Skype going central was just the MS economy of scale thing. You can do P2P on mobile-- ZeroTier has an Android app and soon an iOS one and they work fine. My phone is always pingable on our company LAN and the impact on battery life is in the fractions of a percent. Of course maybe that's more true today... Skype ported to mobile back when phones had slower single-core CPUs and smaller batteries. Radios have quietly gotten way more efficient too, so the constant low-grade peer-to-peer packet slinging doesn't eat as much battery as it might have with earlier generation LTE and WiFi chipsets.
I'm extremely interesting in the ZeroTier on PBX concept. Hoping to test that in the sooner than later time frame. Would be nice to have laptops and cell phones talking to a PBX over ZT rather than some more cumbersome mechanism.
Except most phones can already handle OpenVPN natively. ZT would be nice but you have to figure out how to build it into a phone. or Phone App to make it useful.
The PBX side is easy.
-
@JaredBusch said:
Except most phones can already handle OpenVPN natively. ZT would be nice but you have to figure out how to build it into a phone. or Phone App to make it useful.
OpenVPN on iPhone, for example, has traditionally been a pain.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@JaredBusch said:
Except most phones can already handle OpenVPN natively. ZT would be nice but you have to figure out how to build it into a phone. or Phone App to make it useful.
OpenVPN on iPhone, for example, has traditionally been a pain.
Have you used it in the last year? It has worked well for me.
When the family was in Japan last year, the wife did not even realize that it always turned itself back on when she put her phone on the wifi on the mobile hotspot in Japan.
The iPad that my kids used to watchnetflix simply always was on the VPN, darn near the entire trip.
-
No, not on the iPhone, I'll give it a fresh try, thanks.
-
@JaredBusch said:
Except most phones can already handle OpenVPN natively. ZT would be nice but you have to figure out how to build it into a phone. or Phone App to make it useful.
Are you talking about Android / IOS devices, or the desktop phones? There are already clients for Android devices. According to the Web Site, IOS clients are slated for release in "early 2016".
-
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
It works great on mine. I use it with my FreePBX and it works really well. My Nexus 5 is probably the slowest part of the whole thing.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
Never said that ZT would not work. The issue is the endpoints on the other end.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
Is that it? Is NAT traversal why you would want to run softphones over ZT instead of just connecting them directly to the internet?
-
@Dashrender said:
Is that it? Is NAT traversal why you would want to run softphones over ZT instead of just connecting them directly to the internet?
No, security is the main reason. NAT traversal is easy (ish) to deal with.
-
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
How are they doing this?
I'd like to try this with a www.3CX.com VOIP -
@scottalanmiller I disagree about NAT traversal being easy. It isn't too bad in, say, 90% of cases, but there's a long tail of awful edge cases and bad NATs that are terrible to deal with. We know this all too well.
-
@FATeknollogee said:
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
How are they doing this?
I'd like to try this with a www.3CX.com VOIPJust install it and away you go! Nothing 3CX specific would be needed.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@FATeknollogee said:
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
How are they doing this?
I'd like to try this with a www.3CX.com VOIPJust install it and away you go! Nothing 3CX specific would be needed.
How would you deal with remote handsets?
-
@FATeknollogee said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@FATeknollogee said:
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
How are they doing this?
I'd like to try this with a www.3CX.com VOIPJust install it and away you go! Nothing 3CX specific would be needed.
How would you deal with remote handsets?
You'd have to use a zt gateway.
-
@FATeknollogee said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@FATeknollogee said:
@adam.ierymenko said:
@scottalanmiller People already run PBXes and VOIP over ZeroTier and say it works great. No need to worry about NAT-t, etc.
How are they doing this?
I'd like to try this with a www.3CX.com VOIPJust install it and away you go! Nothing 3CX specific would be needed.
How would you deal with remote handsets?
ZT goes on every node. Same as with more traditional VPN technologies. If you use OpenVPN, every handset needs OpenVPN on it, too.
-
