[JDEV] File transfer and Jabber
wegrzyn at garbagedump.com
Mon Apr 23 12:43:33 CDT 2001
While I generally lurk on this group, and play around with both the client
and server side, I've already done what is suggested in Iain's eMail. I find
OOB is the way to go, and I use WebDav as the standard (Apache does very
well at WebDav, so it makes a nice, easy way to play).
Here is what I was thinking about when I did it. First, any WebDav server
could register with Jabber. They would give some sort of "quality" to the
the service they are going to offer - like max. file size, speed of
connection, length of time the file could live on the server, etc. The
client, in sending a file to a WebDav server could pick from any server
listed. The file is transfered OOB to the server on it's way to the targeted
client. Both the sender and receiver get a message with the URL in it.
I came up with this model because it seems a cool way to add "value-added"
services to Jabber (and have a means of making money from the service). For
instance, one of the services could be for digital rights managed documents,
From: jdev-admin at jabber.org [mailto:jdev-admin at jabber.org]On Behalf Of
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 10:15 AM
To: jdev at jabber.org
Subject: Re: [JDEV] File transfer and Jabber
At 06:46 PM 4/22/2001 -0700, Jens Alfke wrote:
>>Since we already have the whole connection system in jabber I was thinking
>>of when I want to transfer a file, I'll send it to the server that I am
>>connected to and send the file as chunks (size and rate depending on
>In-band file transfer seems to be a somewhat controversial topic. I
>brought it up a few weeks ago and several people objected to sending all
>that data through the server. It is, however, by far the most
>straightforward solution to firewall and NAT issues.
I think its perfectly "legit" for client developers to approach this
problem this way. However, I think in terms of scaling Jabber up as an
overall system, this would severely limit the size of a practical Jabber
user community. The traffic through a Jabber server would just be too high
if file sharing became widespread and took this approach.
I believe that if Jabber client developers want to see Jabber grow to the
popularity of a system like AIM we need to consider what a Jabber system
with 1 million users would look like and how to make that
practical. In-band file transfers are just not feasible using this
approach. Oob file transfers must be the solution. This allows the heavy
bandwidth usage to be distributed and shared. Either direct
client-to-client or client-server-client where the server can be switched
to some other system.
How about this for a proposal. Define specifications for a separate oob
server. To make it simple to convert any web server into a compliant oob
server, we define the system using only httpd. It accepts file uploads
given authentication, and allows file downloads using temporary URL
links. Part of the standard should be incentives to run oob servers by
people other than Jabber. For example, perhaps the standard defines that
clients must download from the oob server an URL, an image file (one of say
three types defining three standard ad size types), and the requested URL.
Clients transferring files out do the following:
Client hits oob server with a standard HTML form submitted and filled out
with standardized authentication information.
Server responds with a standard HTML page either defining login success or
Authenticated clients use http file upload to upload the file.
Server responds with a page with the temporary URL the file obtain be
obtained, a one time key to access the file, and a timeout value specifying
the amount of time the URL will be valid.
Client uses Jabber to send a message to client transferring file in with
the URL, one time key, and timeout value.
Clients transferring files in do the following
Client receives jabber message with file URL, one time key, and timeout.
Client hits the oob server at the URL given, specifying the one time key as
a cookie. It must actually perform three downloads to be compliant:
URL - Contains the ad html link, FILE_URL, and ad image options or
html indicating no ad required
AD_URL/ad_size.png or ad_size.svg - Contains the Ad image. The
entire and exact URL was specified in the ad image options list.
FILE_URL/file.x - A direct link to the desired file (also obtained
from the original URL)
The client is then required to display the ad and link it to the ad
HTML. The commercial aspect (ads) is there to encourage third parties to
host oob servers. People generous enough to donate free oob servers will
of course have the option of not turning on ads. The client transferring
information out is the one that has created an account with a given oob
server (and agreed to whatever ad system they run). The client getting
files doesn't need to have any oob server accounts to participate. If you
want to encourage file sharing, then you could reverse that so that the
client getting files must have the oob server account, and that initial
login is reversed (the downloading client logs in, gets the one time key,
the uploading client uses the key as a cookie to perform the upload, then
the downloading client uses the key and the url info to get the file).
I think its easier to envision some system like this scaling and being more
practical from a "who's going to pay for the bandwidth" point of view.
jdev mailing list
jdev at jabber.org
More information about the JDev