[standards-jig] JEP-0025

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Mon Jan 19 20:22:09 UTC 2004

On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 11:07:21AM -0800, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Sunday 18 January 2004 07:03 am, Dave Smith wrote:
> > Herein lies the fundamental problem with your arguments -- you're
> > approaching this as a traditional XMPP over TCP developer, not a XMPP
> > over HTTP developer. This protocol is meant to be easy for developers
> > with experience using HTTP, hence the abandonment of the "XML Stream"
> > concept, and our customized SASL/TLS negotiation and management
> > protocols. Arguing that this JEP is more difficult for _you_ to
> > implement, given your XMPP-centric toolbox isn't really a concern to
> > me, since you are only marginally the intended audience. The idea is to
> > make it easy for non-traditional XMPP developers (i.e. people who
> > haven't had a chance to enjoy a persistent TCP connection, etc.) to use
> > XMPP in their native environments.
> Well, I can't argue with this.  For the target audience you describe, it 
> probably makes sense.  However, for the existing 'TCP developer' audience, of 
> which there are vastly more of us, JEP-25 seems more practical.  The fact 
> that a server can be JEP-25-enabled without even modifying the server code is 
> compelling, isn't it?  I'd rather not see this capability obsoleted.  Maybe 
> there is room for two here.

So it seems that we need to clearly define:

1. The target audiences
2. The needs of each

Then determine whether we need one JEP or two.

But JEP-0025 does require someone to write a server-side piece, no? No 
mere Jabber/XMPP server accepts client HTTP connections out of the box.


Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation

More information about the Standards mailing list