I applaud this effort. Jitsi is nothing new and predates all the Skype hype. My guess is it may even be true "end to end," i.e. it relies on no third party "service" that Joe User would find a little too much hassle to run himself, such as XMPP (or even SIP, for that matter).

But the first problem I have with Jitsi is that the source is still not open. Looking at current website you have to be a "project member".

It's Java-based, right? I want to see that code. If the solution I'm using is less than a few hundred lines of C (quite manageable for any security analysis), why should I blindly (i.e. without seeing the code) switch to Jitsi?

These p2p threads are continually entertaining because they prove time and again how many people still think NAT traversal is some sort of "magic" requiring special expertise (e.g., that only Skype or some other private company has).

That might just be a myth.

Example: Proving a negative. If I can't find a piece of code to do some task does that mean it does not exist? Maybe I just can't find it?

agranig himself mentions a couple of things that are in wide use but "little known". Not every solution is going to be widely known. That does not mean such solutions do not exist.

re: p2p stuff

Read the code before you read the marketing copy.