[Foundation] HEG Council Questions Answers

Harold E. Gottschalk Jr. heg at imissary.com
Tue Aug 6 20:22:52 CDT 2002

Enclosed are my answers, thank you for the opportunity.

> 1. What do you think is working and not working with regard 
> to the JEP process? What suggestions do you have for improvement?

I have not been very involved with the JEP process except for helping
out on some small part of one JEP.  I can only guess that the process
may be slower then the desires of some participants.

> 2. From a purely technical standpoint, what differentiates 
> Jabber from SIP, SIMPLE, and related technologies? Why (or 
> why not) is XMPP a better choice for many applications than 
> transporting XML/MIME payloads via SIP?

SIP is similar to SMTP in its implementation which uses plain text and
EOL to communicate its protocol.  Jabber use XML streams to communicate
its protocol, they are similar in their addressing schemes.  One large
difference is the lack of a resource concept in SIP.

No comment (NC) for part 2 of the question. Have not done sufficient
research to address the answer.

> 3. Why do you think it is necessary to develop a pub/sub 
> protocol for Jabber? Please provide specific examples. In 
> particular, it seems that there should be some useful synergy 
> among pub/sub, message queueing, and presence. How do you see 
> this fleshing out in specific applications?

Since I see Jabber as a great app2app or app2p or p2app platform.
Service will need a std protocol for requesting and the deliverance of
the service.

NC on the remaining part of the question.

> 4. How do you think ownership of the trademark on the Jabber 
> term should be handled?

Well ownership of the term belongs to Jabber, Inc. they bought it and
deserve to use and set clear use terms.  My view is Jabber is a nice
word, but it is only a word and that jabber the technology will live
with or without using the term.  XMPP is not as sexy, but comes with no
strings attached except for the expectation of compliance to the

> 5. How do we establish trust between servers on an Internet scale?

This could be done via some set of registered keys that are used to
validate a server using any number of encryption technologies.

> 6. Do you think we should build a mechanism for in-band 
> transport of large payloads within Jabber? 

Yes we should allow for in-band transport if it is a supported feature
of the server installation that the data must pass through.

If not and you 
> think an out-of-band transport is sufficient, how do you see 
> that as different from SIP?

> 7. How can the growing complexity and functionality of the 
> Jabber protocol be balanced with simplicity and 
> developer-friendliness?

Just as with SMTP you have core functionality that is easily implemented
and extended functionality that can be implemented as an optional

> 8. How can the JSF and the Jabber technical community best 
> work with other standards organizations, specifically the 
> IETF and any possible Working Group the IETF forms to to 
> pursue standardization of the core Jabber protocol?

If excepted by the IETF JSF members and the community should get
involved in the working groups.  Work on keeping to the schedules that
are laid out.

Harold E. Gottschalk Jr.

More information about the Members mailing list