[IOT] An implementer's review of the IoT XEPs

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Sun Dec 18 20:47:17 UTC 2016


On 15.11.2016 14:44, CONZON DAVIDE wrote:
> I totally agree, one of the main issues indicated by the “opponents” to
> the use of XMPP in IoT is about its overhead,
> compared with other protocols, like MQTT.

I don't think that XMPP has an inherent overhead besides it being XML
based. And that overhead can likely be heavily reduced by EXI and the like.

The main problem, and that is not specific to XMPP, is bad protocol
design which imposes unnecessary packets (in XMPPs' case: stanzas) on
the wire.

> So, I think that we need to avoid to have the friendship equivalent to a
> symmetric presence subscription.
> In the same time, the possibility to have presence notifications must
> remain as an option,

Of course. No one is talking about forbidding it. But symmetric presence
subscription should not be be *required*. And I think we should design
the XMPP IoT protocol(s) based on that assumption.

> since I can imagine several scenarios where these notifications can be
> useful.

Could you elaborate on those?

- Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 603 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20161218/fe277c44/attachment.sig>


More information about the IOT mailing list