

It's 2012, and there's still no official SIP to Skype gateway - xxqs

Any idea why Skype does not provide any official means to call skype accounts from a SIP connection? Even a paid interface is not available.
The only thing that is available is a paid service where you can call phone numbers from Skype to your SIP trunk<p>so, there's a huge world of SIP telephony, and another huge world of Skype users. And they don't talk to each other.<p>I'm not considering dirty hacks which bind Asterisk or FreeSWITCH with a Skype GUI client installed on the same machine.
======
wmf
The purpose of Skype is to have a monopoly on the namespace and interop
threatens that. Realistically, don't most people use SIP with phones that can
only dial numbers?

~~~
xxqs
there's plenty of ways to assign a numeric alias to a SIP name. For example, I
run a virtual PBX with my internal numbering plan. I could assign internal
numbers to skype names, for example.

------
blakdawg
Who would make money if this existed? Who would lose money? I have a hard time
articulating a concrete benefit for Microsoft that would result from a
gateway.

~~~
xxqs
as I mentioned in above comment, I already pay for skype-to-PSTN calls, and I
wouldn't mind paying for SIP<=>Skype calls as well

------
tnuc
>so, there's a huge world of SIP telephony, and another huge world of Skype
users. And they don't talk to each other.

They do talk to each other, users pay for the privilege.

Think of it as a win/win for skype/sip providers. Just not a win for the
users.

~~~
xxqs
see my other comment below. I know about SkypeConnect, and it's only usable
for particular types of businesses.

the win/win for sype/sip providers is only when the calls go through PSTN
beween them.

~~~
tnuc
>I know about SkypeConnect, and it's only usable for particular types of
businesses.

I didn't mention skype connect.

>the win/win for sype/sip providers is only when the calls go through PSTN
beween them.

Do you really think the operators of skype or the sip providers cut the PSTN
people in for anything when they don't have to? The only direct through pstn
as a last resort.

I have called peoples skype-in numbers from my skype account. I do get charged
for this. I am certain it goes through no pstn network.

~~~
xxqs
could you be more specific? what exactly service did you talk about in the top
comment?

~~~
tnuc
>what exactly service did you talk about in the top comment?

Skype.

~~~
xxqs
>They do talk to each other, users pay for the privilege.

what exactly service are you talking about? what kind of communication,
between which parties?

------
mcs
There's an online service called Blue Jeans Network that lets you have a
conference call with Skype, H.323, Google Talk, and Microsoft Lync
participants.

<http://bluejeans.com/>

~~~
xxqs
yes there are some services like this. I tried Comfytel about a month ago:
[http://txlab.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/comfytel-com-one-
more-...](http://txlab.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/comfytel-com-one-more-free-
pstn-to-sip-gateway-provider/)

the problem was, about 30% of calls didn't reach my skype client. I guess
Comfytel uses one of those dirty hacks. Probably bluejeans too.

~~~
mcs
I used to work there, and they have a skypekit license. It doesn't use the
"spawn a skype linux client and use the plugin interface" method, it's a
direct integration.

~~~
xxqs
hmm, thanks. It's probably a quite expensive license, as the default developer
agreement is quite restrictive: [http://www.mail-archive.com/asterisk-
dev@lists.digium.com/ms...](http://www.mail-archive.com/asterisk-
dev@lists.digium.com/msg48959.html)

any explanation why 30% of calls were dropped?

------
iso8859-1
Here's a link for the hack you mentioned:
[http://www.personal.psu.edu/wcs131/blogs/psuvoip/2011/12/sky...](http://www.personal.psu.edu/wcs131/blogs/psuvoip/2011/12/skype_for_asterisk_the_hard_way.html)

~~~
xxqs
yes, and I'll never run it on my voip server :)

------
learntogoogle
"Still no"?

There was "Skype for Asterisk" for a long time, and unsurprisingly it's the
first hit on Google. It was killed shortly after MS bought Skype. Life is hard
when you buy into proprietary protocols.

~~~
ComputerGuru
It was killed shortly after MS bought Skype, but it wasn't MS that killed it.

A year+ before, Asterisk users received an email saying that the contract
would not be renewed.

------
vollmarj
So... Skype launched their official SIP service years ago. It is called Skype
Connect. They wouldn't provide a gateway because that would cannibalize their
low cost SIP trunking service. See <http://www.skype.com/intl/en-
us/business/skype-connect/>

~~~
xxqs
this service does not allow to call a skype user from a SIP trunk. What they
offer is just a regular SIP-to-PSTN service, plus a way for skype users to
call into your SIP trunk.

I am paying Skype for PSTN calls already. I wouldn't also mind paying them for
SIP-to-Skype and Skype-to-SIP (with any public SIP destination) calls if there
were such service.

------
wslh
It is complex to fully reverse engineer Skype:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol>

~~~
xxqs
I'm actually talking about officially supported ways of communicating, not
hacking

------
patrocles
and no IPv6.

granted, getting rid of NAT probably means Skype dies

~~~
xxqs
I don't think so. They have an easy to use client, and a huge user base. I
guess they will also add ipv6 support as soon there's enough ipv6 adoption on
the residential market.

I also don't have ipv6 at home from my cable provider, and they don't even
tell when I can expect it.

