iOS 10 Quietly Deprecated A Crucial API For VoIP and Communication Apps (apple.com) 122
neutrino38 warns that iOS 10 includes a significant change "overlooked by the general public":
It deprecates an API that is crucial for VoIP and other instant messaging applications that enable keeping one socket active despite the fact that the application would run in the background. As a replacement, developers need to use PushKit: when an incoming call is to be forwarded to an iOS VoIP client, the VoIP infrastructure needs to:
- withold the call
- contact Apple push infrastructure using a proprietary protocol to wake up the client app remotely
- wait for the application to reconnect to the infrastructure and release the call when it is ready
This "I know better than you" approach is meant to further optimize battery life on iOS devices by avoiding the use of resources by apps running in background. It has also the positive effect of forcing developers to switch to a push model and remove all periodic pollings that ultimately use mobile data and clog the Internet. However, the decision to use an Apple infrastructure has many consequences for VoIP providers:
- the reliability of serving incoming calls is directly bound to Apple service
- Apple may revoke the PushKit certificate. It thus has life and death decision power over third-party communication infrastructures
- organizations wanting to setup IPBX and use iOS client have no option but to open access for the push services of Apple in their firewall
- It is not possible to have iOS VoIP or communication clients in network disconnected from the Internet - Pure standard SIP clients are now broken on iOS
The original submission argues that Apple is creating "the perfect walled garden," adding that "Ironically, the only VoIP 'app' that is not affected is the (future?) VoLTE client that will be added to iOS one day."
- withold the call
- contact Apple push infrastructure using a proprietary protocol to wake up the client app remotely
- wait for the application to reconnect to the infrastructure and release the call when it is ready
This "I know better than you" approach is meant to further optimize battery life on iOS devices by avoiding the use of resources by apps running in background. It has also the positive effect of forcing developers to switch to a push model and remove all periodic pollings that ultimately use mobile data and clog the Internet. However, the decision to use an Apple infrastructure has many consequences for VoIP providers:
- the reliability of serving incoming calls is directly bound to Apple service
- Apple may revoke the PushKit certificate. It thus has life and death decision power over third-party communication infrastructures
- organizations wanting to setup IPBX and use iOS client have no option but to open access for the push services of Apple in their firewall
- It is not possible to have iOS VoIP or communication clients in network disconnected from the Internet - Pure standard SIP clients are now broken on iOS
The original submission argues that Apple is creating "the perfect walled garden," adding that "Ironically, the only VoIP 'app' that is not affected is the (future?) VoLTE client that will be added to iOS one day."
Meh (Score:2, Troll)
Re: Meh (Score:5, Funny)
What an amazing world we live in, that a state of the art device featuring communication radios, cameras, a display, and phonomenal processing power is available for the same price as a chunk of metal.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What an amazing world we live in, that a state of the art device featuring communication radios, cameras, a display, and phonomenal processing power is available for the same price as a chunk of metal.
Yet the the people who make these things need suicide nets around the buildings because.. reasons?
Re: Meh (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet the the people who make these things need suicide nets around the buildings because..
Re: (Score:2)
I hate to break your bitter pill, but once American colleges fully implement the mandatory age-parity quotas, your beloved suicide rate will no longer thrive in this equation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Meh (Score:1)
I have old 486 motherboards where the ISA slot board edge connectors are branded Foxconn.
Re: (Score:2)
I have old 486 motherboards where the ISA slot board edge connectors are branded Foxconn.
You have any Intel branded Mobo from the last 15 years? Made by Foxconn.
Apparently not. that this is not und only uses 25 year old 486 computers.
Re: Meh (Score:1)
The silver will retain it's worth. Five years later what is the Iphone worth?
It's needed to preserve the battery (Score:5, Interesting)
It provides defense against lazy app writers. And it's courageous.
Re: It's needed to preserve the battery (Score:1)
Lazy app writers are the reason so much shit is on the Android platform and Steam platform. Lazy writers use middleware libraries without understanding the consequences of their use.
Re: (Score:2)
The company cares about security, battery life, and customer satisfaction.
Yeah, that doesn't sound like it was copy-pasted from Apple's Marketing Dept.
Re: It's needed to preserve the battery (Score:5, Insightful)
It just shows you who Apple thinks itâ(TM)s customer is. Theyâ(TM)re choosing to favour their user experience over their app developers wish to be lazy and to potentially do neferious things tracking the user constantly.
Not that surprising considering which of those pays Apple to buy a price of hardware. And not the kind of move google would do given that the app developer is their true customer.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly the opposite of
Re: (Score:2)
Who needs fricking Unicode support to type an apostrophe? It is ASCII code 39, that should be compatible enough with anything. But, no, people use fancy Unicode apostrophes, sometimes OS specific. Why?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, it makes me think that every time something is working fine, somebody comes along to change it. Typewriter apostrophe has been around, well, since typewriters!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
MS-WORD doesn't even use the same quotation marks for English and French because of those printing inspired people that say that a symbol looks nicer than another depending on the language, establish trends etc. when the used symbol adds no value at all and everybody understands what the symbol means a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nice find; printing is older than typewriters!
Re: (Score:2)
Ahhh. Your problem is you don't know the difference between an apostrophe and single or curly quotes.
Neither do you. The appropriate punctuation symbol for it's and they're is an apostrophe.
It looks like the AC got some of the quotation marks correct, but wanted to use a righthand single curly quotation mark in place of an apostrophe (and clicked through the preview without looking at it).
Re: It's needed to preserve the battery (Score:2)
They favor their own pockets and draconic tendencies and nothing else. You are nothing but cow for them to be regularly milked.
Their REAL customers (Score:1)
the carrier don't like what was disabled. Now you can't use an iPhone handset to bypass the carrier using VOIP
Re: (Score:2)
the carrier don't like what was disabled. Now you can't use an iPhone handset to bypass the carrier using VOIP
Please explain this, since your comment means that one of us doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
Re: Their REAL customers (Score:2)
Why would the carrier even CARE anymore? Actual voice calls are NOW almost more trouble & taxes than they're worth.
Data, on the other hand, is their new big-ticket billable item... they LOVE apps that constantly poll for data, because a single-byte payload in a TCP/IP request generates a few hundred billable bytes of data transfer. Carriers would abandon voice & MAKE you find your own VoIP service if they thought they could get away with it. Voice calls are now just a loss-leader to sell data.
With s
Re: (Score:2)
Unlimited and free are not the same thing.
I'm not doubting you, but do you have any sort of citation for that statement?
Re: (Score:3)
In many ways carriers are becoming a dumb pipe and the evolution of their plans suggest that they are realising this. In many ways charging for data is of more value than charging for voice, if everyone is moving to third party apps.
The value of keeping a phone number with your carrier is that it is still the closest to an universal contact ID, working across carriers. The same can't be said for solutions such as WhatsApp, Skype, Facebook and Google Hangouts.
Re: Their REAL customers (Score:2)
I can't quote a URL, but I used to work for a major telco & had a role in writing our billing software. Circa 2009, it cost *us* (in taxes and Tariff-mandated fees) more to terminate a landline call from Fort Lauderdale to Boca Raton than it cost for us to terminate a call from a landline phone in Fort Lauderdale to a landline phone in BRITAIN --
because intra-LATA calls (a/k/a "local long-distance" calls) were among the most expensive ones you could make, while international calls actually had t
Re: (Score:1)
When so many plans are "unlimited calls and texts, some GB of data and if you go over you pay", calls are effectively free once you've paid your monthly base rate. You could spend the entire month on the phone 24/7 and not pay a cent more than if you never make a voice call. But for the carrier, each call consumes resources on their network, and if too many people make calls they have to upgrade their network or quickly gain a reputation for dropped calls. Therefore, a carrier would prefer if you pay for un
Re: (Score:2)
Because data miraculously teleports to the iPhone.
(If you want to claim you only ever use your phone with WiFi, first I don't believe you and second you are moot to carriers since you were already unwilling to be a customer.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Free", which is what my carrier charges for voice calls, is pretty damn cheap.
Carriers want you to use your expensive data plan. This change reduces how much data you use. So it's actually bad for the cellular providers, since you're making more free calls and using less metered data.
Re: Their REAL customers (Score:2)
Yeah, that would make sense if practically every single mobile plan sold today didn't include unlimited call minutes, but limited data. The carriers would much rather the call be VoIP - they stand to make more money from packetized data than voice.
What is the weather like 10 years ago?
Not exactly the truth... (Score:5, Insightful)
VoIP required that your phone was turned on, your app was running, and regularly pulled requests. An absolute battery eater. The new feature allows your phone to be asleep, use no energy, and wake up immediately when a call arrives.
Re: (Score:1)
Cool, guess I don't need to worry about getting calls remotely from my office's SIP phone system anymore. Sweet!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
VoIP required that your phone was turned on, your app was running, and regularly pulled requests. An absolute battery eater.
That's silly. Android systems can sleep for days while have VoIP solutions, like Signal, installed and ready to receive a call (via its own listener).
Unless you're saying iOS is somehow worse than Android in this regard.
Re: Not exactly the truth... (Score:3, Interesting)
That is because nothing about voip requires regular pings. If that was needed on iOS that was defect of the lazy Apple developers and not app develpers.
Re: Not exactly the truth... (Score:2)
I agree.
My Moto X Play (2 year old phone) still gets 2 days battery without issue.
In addition to regular voice & text communications, I have two VOIP lines using Grandstream's GS Wave app. Works fantastic over both Wifi and 3G/4G/LTE.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking my turn-of-the-millenium cellphone's VoIP/SIP app had to be running, but don't recall any issues like regularly pinging a network or incurring a lot of data-traffic.
Of course, I mostly used my phone to listen to MP3s while biking, so might just have been lack of usage.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're saying iOS is somehow worse than Android in this regard.
That's exactly the point of this change. Using PushKit, your phone can sleep for days and will be woken up by a VoIP phone call. The old method that is deprecated doesn't allow that.
Re: (Score:2)
That is actually a valid concern, a company which handles their internal communications through VOIP and a PBX are now reliant on Apple. I trust in avarice though, the risk of harming their brand represents far more money than the peanuts they could pick up with fucking around with the metadata. They make their money selling hardware, not their customers.
By getting all the push messages into the same paging cycle of the mobile data network you can save a bit of energy and they can track apps which are progr
VOIP API on iOS (Score:2)
Apple deprecated the old VoIP interface one year ago. Absolutely obvious for anyone interested. But one year warning will obviously come as a surprise to some people. VoIP required that your phone was turned on, your app was running, and regularly pulled requests. An absolute battery eater. The new feature allows your phone to be asleep, use no energy, and wake up immediately when a call arrives.
Thanks for explaining this. I was curious about how that would affect Vonage Extensions, a VOIP app that I use. If the app still uses the old API, whether it would stop working. Same question for WhatsApp. I know that FaceTime audio is an option, but wouldn't work w/ non iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
It's potentially significant to me. It's new information because as I currently don't use an IOS device, I didn't either need to know this or follow deprecation warnings. It's significant in case I was contemplating getting such a device in the near future. (In the further future this will be rolled into "current features" that I'd evaluate when selecting the device.)
So this is valuable news, at least potentially. (As it happens, I hadn't been seriously thinking of getting a new phone...and my current d
Re: (Score:2)
No need to bounce data via Apple, but the app can still quit when there's no data waiting for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really see the problem with Apple (and Google too) forcing developers to use their push framework to be able to wake up on demand from network traffic.
That said, if they simply use a blocking call on a socket the OS can go to sleep just as deeply as it can when it's all routed through the single push service.
Re: (Score:2)
Got a citation for that? SIP requires a UDP and/or TCP socket to be up and listening. It does not require that any IP data be transferred between calls. It *does* require the phone to communicate with the mobile network frequently enough for incoming calls or data sessions to be routed to the right place, but that is true for voice calls and push notifications as well...
Re: (Score:1)
Apple deprecated the old VoIP interface one year ago.
Actually, they deprecated the old VoIP interface two year ago. And released iOS 10 without it to the public about a year ago. Yes, this a non-story when it was new a year ago. The fucking article is over one year old. For Christ sake, editors on dope again?
Re: (Score:2)
Who was abusing the old API (FB?) (Score:3)
Re: Who was abusing the old API (FB?) (Score:1)
The new inability to poll in the background has at least two drawbacks:
1. increased latency. This is why, with devices like a 'Ring' doorbell, your most likely view -- after the visitor presses the button, the doorbell notifies their server, their server sends a push notification, your phone gets the notification & notifies you, you react to it, unlock the phone, and launch their app -- is (...drumroll...) streaming video of the visitor WALKING AWAY (because they pressed the button 30 seconds ago).
2. Sm
This is great! (Score:5, Funny)
Now the next iPhone can be even thinner! I can't wait to call 911 and tell them I accidently cut myself with my new razor thin iPhone 12! -_-
Re: (Score:3)
I hear they're going to call the next model the iPhone RAZR.
Apple Has Planned This For A While (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
They did, and it really does leave a certain amount of LAN-only applications like my startup's in a lurch.
I had the fortune of having an app server on premise and have written a push bridge, but lots of other developers don't have so much control over their backend (many SIP implementations, etc) and this change fundamentally ends their product viability.
It really hurt us, and required we change strategies. That has been the Apple dance...
Re: (Score:2)
The concern that overrides all this, is that the change makes it impossible to support existing protocols, that do not require Apple-specific cloud infrastructure, on iOS.
Design philosophy (Score:1)
Apple maintains full control over iPhones. It's not meant to be a computer-like device. Background apps have always been kept on a very short leash. An iPhone is a limited device that only does what Apple allows you to do. If you want a phone that is more like a computer, get an Android.
Important question that needs to be asked (Score:1)
will this allow Apple, and as is always the case, any U.S. government agencies to get more insight or even subvert the use of secure communication apps?
Re: (Score:2)
will this allow Apple, and as is always the case, any U.S. government agencies to get more insight or even subvert the use of secure communication apps?
1. You are paranoid. 2. From personal knowledge, no.
Not battery (Score:2)
There is no reason that listening on a socket needs to use ANY battery at all. It WOULD be wise to have a model for checking whether a packet is DoS/dealing with heartbearts before causing it to fire up the real app process, but given that, there is no reason why SIP can't be efficient. If the reasoning for this has anything to do with battery, then it's lazy.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not just a listening socket, because that wouldn't work on most networks (think NAT or firewalls).
You need a constant connection, which means
whoop dee dooo... (Score:2)
Re: Bad battery. (Score:1)
Apple phones are safer than Galaxy Notes because even if the battery does catch fire, it will be a tiny fire that rapidly fizzles out.
Re: (Score:3)
Pushing people to do things 'the right way' is preventing iPhone to turn into Android. This is ONLY targeting lazy developers that haven't updated their app in YEARS (this way of doing it has been possible since 2009 and PushKit as an alternative to polling announced and available since mid-2014).
I'm very glad that VoIP apps don't eat all my battery because they have to poll a service every 5s. Many VoIP apps were simply garbage before iOS 3 and still are on Android, we complain about charging an iPhone onc
Re: Is Anyone Really Surprised (Score:2, Insightful)
They ARE doing the right thing on Android. The only ones doing something wrong is Apple.
Re: (Score:1)
I know you just meant this as a troll but you picked the wrong topic.
If you've been following android, you would know that Android N and O added much the same restrictions as iOS (with regard to apps running in the background or while the phone is dozing)
Re: (Score:2)
So how can the operator of a local area network disconnected from the Internet run a private PushKit server?
Re: (Score:3)
You could proxy it. It uses HTTP/2 so it can be proxied without requiring any SSL-shenanigans but otherwise that is the simplest method.
Alternatively, the push notification protocol is open, well documented and very simple (JSON back and forth), people have made some reference implementations although most simply rely on the Apple infrastructure. Various commercial MDM have the feature although it's too bothersome for most people to set up so it's generally poorly documented since it's only useful for apps