[standards-jig] JNG Ramblings.

Justin Kirby justin at openaether.org
Fri Aug 9 02:41:23 UTC 2002

Right now, I take a tcp stream and pass that as the document source to a
SAX parser. viola jabber client :)

I am under the impression that this brain dead technique would no long
be feasible under this JNG?

On Thu, 2002-08-08 at 22:35, Mike Lin wrote:
> > I second Matthias Wimmer's -1 to binary wire protocol. I know it would 
> > make things increadibly easy for the server and programs, but difficult 
> > for developers and admins.
> I now have something that for the past year has been severely lacking in
> all these discussions: code.
> The Jabber XML Streams implementation I did in OCaml this summer is
> about 600 lines of code in all, not counting the special XML parser I
> had to write to make it work.
> I wrote something to read my binary wire protocol and envelope format
> yesterday afternoon. It's about 250 lines of code, and I'm a lot more
> confident that it works right.
> As I've been saying, I'm working hard to find the right blend so that we
> get the benefits of the binary framing without sacrificing too much of
> the protocol's elegance. The protocol even in raw form is still
> perfectly readable in ethereal (there are just a few extra bytes spread
> here and there), which I think matters much more than telnet-and-type.
> Anyway, this is a question over which reasonable people can disagree. I
> have thought for a long time, and I've become more convinced by
> implementing it, that by using a binary protocol for framing we can get
> enormous benefits for acceptable cost.
> -Mike
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
JID: Zion at openaether.org

     /       \\.
  /|  /''\___/
        /''\__/  |/
     /''\__/    |/
      \\      ./


More information about the Standards mailing list