[Standards-JIG] Disco, Cache, TTL

[Peter Saint-Andre]

JD Conley wrote:
> > My favorite option is SHIM:
> > 
> > http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0131.html

I looked at the issue again, and I still favor Entity Tags:

http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0150.html

> > Of course this requires both server and client participation to make
> > it
> > work well, 

That's true of any such proposal (SHIM or service discovery extensions
or Entity Tags).

> > but could save huge storms of traffic over all links. For
> > example, servers could cache disco from other servers to serve to
> > its
> > own clients. 

Right.

> > -JD
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: standards-jig-bounces at jabber.org
> > [mailto:standards-jig-bounces at jabber.org] On Behalf Of Alexander
> > Gnauck
> > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 9:48 AM
> > To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> > Subject: [Standards-JIG] Disco, Cache, TTL
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I think we should have some extension and best practice for disco
> > caching. We could avoid lots of unnecessary traffic.
> > 
> > What about a TTL like in DNS according to JEP-0128.
> >
> > If you disco a chatserver for chatrooms TTL makes of course no sense
> > because new rooms could be created all the time and we need real
> > time
> > results here. 

We could do disco updates over PEP, naturally. :-)

> > But normally a server configuration doesn't change that
> > often, so it would be no problem to cache this result for a week
> > also
> > over multiple sessions.

Or, as mentioned, retrieve it only after it has changed (via JEP-0150).
Using TTLs requires server admins and client developers to guess about
the most appropriate TTL, which seems suboptimal to me.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml