jeremie at netins.net
Tue Jan 5 11:21:56 CST 1999
> I finally got jabber working. I didn't notice the server/jabber directory
> (you have to compile and run jabber.transport in addition to jabberbox).
> I'm not sure having 2 'server' processes is a great idea, but I do like the
> idea of 'pluggable transports'. I don't think anyone would want to unplug
> the main protocol, but people will want to disable ICQ/AIM addresses: If I
> run my own server (and don't use ICQ), then I don't need the ICQ transport
> at all. (If you are using ICQ, then YOUR server will do ICQ for you).
The(the JabberBox and the native jabber transport) were recently in one
main process, but there was just such a clean break between the two that
it worked well to split them up since they are completly different in
function and philosophy. I plan on having the main Makefile fire off the
other pieces compiling also, and also generate a shell script to
start/stop the server... just haven't gotten there and I'm not much of a
make wizzard :)
> > you should have a central meta-server which
> > keeps track of other servers.
> Yes and no. Yes, it would be cool for a list of public servers (like public
> freenets, they will give you jabber accounts). But on the other hand, we
> don't need to list ALL servers. For instance, if I run a server on my
> cablemodem linux box, I don't want random people talking to it. It would
> only have my account on it, so nobody else needs to know (except my
> friends). I wouldn't want my jabber server or address listed in a public
> list any more than I want my e-mail on a 'meta-email list'. Since jabber is
> distributed, there is no need for a meta server.
Absolutely, just optional for those servers that want to be public, very
similiar to http://shoutcast.com/
> You might want a meta server for 'phone-book' like address lookups, but I
> think there are enough phonebooks out there that we don't need another. We
> could standardize a jabber URL, so we can click on
> "jabber://firstname.lastname@example.org" to start a conversation.
Interesting idea... hmmm... maybe more like email, jabber:user at server.com
It should be relatively easy to add a client to Mozilla after we make a
bit more progress :)
> > The protocol is mostly just for carrying content, not tech details like
> > ports/etc...
> But without standard ports, trying to contact bob at random-server.com won't
> work very well.
Oh, I absolutely agree on that! The standard server<->server port is 5269
and the standard client<->server port is 5222.
More information about the JDev