[Operators] Future of XMPP Re: The Google issue
pizza at shaftnet.org
Tue Dec 3 22:55:49 UTC 2013
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 11:03:27PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
> There are already chips around which can do wifi or hardwired IP by
> them self. No need for a complicated operating system whatever that
> might be. And no, I don't want to discuss the "OS" inside those
> chips, nor did I want to discuss about any OS or the necessary
> transport layers. Otherwise we could extend the discussion to the
> used materials too, e.g. if the capacitors are ready for industrial
> use or what happens in radioactive environments or ...
You make a fair point, but the weakness in it is that those hardwired
ICs or devices have an extremely limited set of capabilities that are
wholly inadequate for use on an untrusted global network.
> So you think it is an elegant way that if a machine wants to send 10
> binary bytes to another machine, it is ok to put them into mime64,
> pack that into XML, authorize and authenticate with an XMPP-server.
> doing the necessary presence stuff to finally send out a message or
It sounds like your objection is to the use of XMPP more so than its use
of XML. If you don't want (or need) XMPP's feature set
(discoverability, authentication, presence, security, etc) then why
would you use it to begin with? If you do need that feature set, then
you're going to have to deal with the complexity those features
Meanwhile, back on the XML front -- if those "ten binary bytes" need to
go aross the public internet to unknown/unstable IP addresses and be
secure from snooping or spoofing, then the added complexity of XML
encoding is pretty minor once you have all the other parts in place.
Nevermind what happens when it's time to introduce a new message type
or another argument to an existing type. Are you absolutely sure you
didn't break your parser in the process? Does the old parser
handle the new messages without errors?
> Thats why there were so few critical bugs in XML parsers.
And there been very few critical bugs in non-XML parsers, eh? :)
> Anyway, I've learned that I shouldn't say something against lovely
> XMPP on these lovely lists. And I agree that XMPP solved every
> communication problem mankind could think about, otherwise I
> wouldn't have written a C++-XMPP-server. ;)
I don't understand where your sarcasm and defensiveness is coming from.
XMPP, like any engineering effort, required tradeoffs between
conflicting prinicples. The gains from using XML as a transport layer
vastly exceeded the downsides. Over time, that tradeoff has only become
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Delray Beach, FL ^^ (email/xmpp) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Operators