[Operators] Google Talk Doesn't Perform S2S with Random JabberServers
admin at flosoft.biz
Wed Feb 20 10:52:15 CST 2008
<58E4DE63-5BFA-42D9-9531-5A5B1A54FCC8 at process-one.net>
<47BB5BBA.6040809 at stpeter.im> <47BC595E.8050709 at doit.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <1cc76f79373e07f3386ad3a4d1dc2813 at flosoft.biz>
X-Sender: admin at flosoft.biz
Received: from d51A43592.access.telenet.be [184.108.40.206]
with HTTP/1.1 (POST); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:52:15 +0100
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I think, but this might be wrong, that Google is currently using the
mentality of: We are the biggest XMPP Server, so we can lay down the rules.
Other people should adopt them.
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:46:22 -0600, Jesse Thompson
<jesse.thompson at doit.wisc.edu> wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> MickaÃ«l RÃ©mond wrote:
>>> From what I know Google has changed two weeks ago the way they handle
>>> s2s. They have added more servers that can handle s2s (know you can
>>> reach several different ip for s2s).
>>> It broke s2s for several hosts. I suspect they have added some kind of
>>> regulation or anti abuse mecanism that cause trouble to some.
>> It seems that the problem happens only with services that produce a
>> small volume of traffic over the federated link. Perhaps they have some
>> automatic timeouts? I'm trying to find out more about the problem from
>> folks at Google.
> small volume of traffic: as in too little? Our test environment works
> fine, and it produces almost no traffic to Google. Or, as in too much
> traffic? Then why does it work with jabber.org?
> federated link: as opposed to what?
> It's odd that Google doesn't engage the XMPP community. Don't they want
> their service to work with others? If they collaborate, we might be
> able to help them deal with the issues, because some day we'll all be
> dealing with the same issues to some extent.
Flosoft.biz / CEK Media Service
CEK Media Service
More information about the Operators