[standards-jig] IBB Again
David 'TheRaven' Chisnall
theraven at sucs.org
Tue May 6 11:25:03 UTC 2003
On the other hand, this kind of delivery would only be used as a
fall-back by people unable to use a direct connection (due to firewalls,
NATs etc), for whom a crap connection may well be better than no
connection at all...
Jacek Konieczny wrote:
>On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 11:56:06AM +0100, David 'TheRaven' Chisnall wrote:
>>As a common denominator, almost all unreliable protocols (such as those
>>based on RTP) are using UDP at the network layer, so surely all that is
>>required is a mechanism for transporting UDP datagrams over the Jabber
>>network? This can be done simply by embedding each datagram, base 64
>>encoded, in a message tag, and having the server drop those messages
>>that karma settings mean would require excessive bandwidth. What have I
>Jabber connection are made over TCP. And packets that are not dropped by
>Jabber may be retransmitted at TCP level if some IP packets are dropped.
>This may cause unacceptable delays. All advantages of using unreliable
>protocols are lost when they are implemented over TCP, and many TCP
>disadvantages are multiplied then.
>Standards-JIG mailing list
>Standards-JIG at jabber.org
More information about the Standards