[AG-TECH] AG calling

[R. P. Channing ["Rick"] Rodgers]

This does indeed look pretty interesting!  How about AG4?  :)

Derek Piper wrote:
>
>     Yes, looks like Steve Smith was right on the money with that. So 
> what happened with that project? I'd think that would have been a 
> smarter way to go with AG3.. ah well.
>
>     Derek
>
> Andrew Sharpe wrote:
>> Hi Derek, you might like a read of 
>> http://people.vislab.usyd.edu.au/~ssmith/apac05/apac05-presentation.pdf
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> Derek Piper wrote:
>>>
>>>     Hi all,
>>>
>>>     Something I was thinking about was the differences between AG 
>>> and H.323 and I was wondering if a 'blend' of the two, in a way, 
>>> would be an interesting direction to go in.
>>>     What I'm thinking about is this, and of course there are many 
>>> questions and details to work out but I thought I'd bring it up to 
>>> see what people might think:
>>>
>>> A 'Call server' that people log in to when the 'AG caller' client 
>>> starts, analogous to the IM server, Jabber server or H.323 'gateway'
>>>     Allows IM communication with all those connected
>>>     'Buddy lists' to see who's on?
>>>     What about distribution of servers.. would you need an account 
>>> on every server in the world? what about a registry of servers?
>>>
>>> IM 'calling' ..i.e. make a noise, flash something.. get user attention.
>>>     nicer than speakers on hanging around in a venue
>>>     people who don't know you're on or where you're on may stand a 
>>> better chance of contacting you :>
>>>
>>> Initiate video call just allocates IP addresses in the same way as a 
>>> venue and runs media tools against either multicast or unicast to a 
>>> bridge if that preference is set.
>>>     Simple 2-way video conferencing. We've achieved 'AG Skype'
>>>
>>> Add another participant to a 'call' by invite or by messaging each 
>>> participant.
>>>
>>> Could also move to 'conference room' which is the same as an AG 
>>> venue is now.
>>>     Maybe launch full AG VenueClient at that venue?
>>>     Then you could do the same shared-app stuff as we have now.
>>>
>>>
>>>     I'm kicking this around as a possibility and a direction for a 
>>> project either as something that the AGtk moves towards or is an 
>>> add-on for it. One of the things I've noticed is that polycoms are 
>>> often used as a back channel and an ad-hoc meeting method because 
>>> you can *call* someone. It's a videophone. AG relies on someone 
>>> turning up where you are, and that's sometimes very awkward and not 
>>> what people want to do.
>>>     Basically to implement it seeing as we have a Jabber integration 
>>> doesn't seem that hard on the surface. The client would start off to 
>>> appearing something like GAIM, Psi or Skype and you place a video 
>>> call to someone or start a conference in a venue.
>>>
>>>     I'm curious to hear some points of view about it.
>>>
>>>     Derek
>>>
>>
>>
>