[h323plus] [Opalvoip-devel] [Openh323-devel] [Openh323gk-developer] opalvoip vs h323plus

Robert Jongbloed robert.jongbloed at bigpond.com
Sun Nov 4 02:24:57 EST 2007

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opalvoip-devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:opalvoip-
> devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Simon Horne
> Let me clear something up. GnuGk has numerous new features with the
> h323plus
> library over the openh323 library including H.350 LDAP, H.341 SNMP
> and
> numereous H.460 features including H.460.9 real-time Qos
> measurements,
> H.460.followme and the latest H.460 NAT Traversal technology P2Pnat
> Media
> and Presence implementation which should be available in the v2.2.8
> release.
> The project is continuing it's evolutionary development just fine
> without
> the need for Opal.

OK, that was a misinterpretation by me when Jan said he did not need 90% of
OPAL code. I extrapolated that to mean  he did not use much of OpenH323
either. And I was unaware that they have been using the "plus" branch, I
incorrectly assumed they were on the trunk.

> I wish to caution you on misleading people.

Oh, now things are getting nasty. When accusations like this happen it is
certainly time for the discussion to stop.

> Opal currently, as far as
> I
> know, has no additional H.323 features over the existing openh323
> library
> (aside the video plugins support) unless I'm mistaken looking at the
> can't see anything new?. While h323plus which has been developed over
> the
> last 12 months as a branch of openh323 and has a substantial array,
> as
> mentioned previously, of new features
> http://www.h323plus.org/standards/
> most of which are not currently available in OpalVoIP.

And why are they not in OPAL? Because effort is divided between two

> Now, as I said before, you are quite welcome to port any of these
> ideas to
> Opal but to infer the latest wizzbang H.323 stuff is in Opal (at
> least at
> the moment) is being misleading...

That is not what I meant. I did not mention OpenH323 features explicitly.
And if things had gone the way I had originally envisioned with all new
development being in OPAL then this statement would be 100% true. As it is,
it is only true for non-H.323 features.

> I carefully remind you that the decision to fork Opal out of OpenH323
> was

There is that work "fork" again, even though I have tried hard to remove it
from perceptions. The real fork happened FOUR YEAR AGO. The move to a
different repository is just admin.

> On that note, I strongly suggest, as I hinted
> before,
> we bring this discussion to a permanent close.

Agreed. But accusations of deliberately misleading people could not go

Robert Jongbloed
OPAL/OpenH323 Architect and Co-founder.

More information about the h323plus mailing list