[standards-jig] JNG Ramblings.

Joe Hildebrand jhildebrand at jabber.com
Mon Aug 12 19:19:13 UTC 2002


Mike Lin <mikelin at MIT.EDU> writes:

> I'm sorry, but this is really terribly frustrating. I'm spending all
> this time carefully reading mostly knee-jerk reactions to an idea I've
> been thinking about for a long time. Why are you trying to criticize my
> ideas when you obviously haven't read them, let alone thought them
> through?

This was in response to DW's message, but I just wanted to make sure
you didn't think I was criticizing your idea.  I was just trying to
provide more background on the jabber-net implementation for those
that cared.

To go on record: 

I'm not sure whether a different framing protocol is right.  I'm
pretty sure we've achieved the scalability we have due to our use of
element per packet vs. document per packet, but without actual
real-world load tests of both, I can't be sure.  More framing may also
help, but again, we do a pretty good job now.  Maybe I'm being naive,
or haning out with the wrong crowd, but server performance matters
more than client performance, and our server does pretty well.
Really, I think the point of framing should be the ability to send
binary data without encoding.

With respect to having read your stuff, guilty as charged. :) I'm
working through it now.  It looks really BEEPy at my first glance.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand




More information about the Standards mailing list