[Standards-JIG] Q about shorter tag names

Ulrich Staudinger us at activestocks.de
Sun Nov 20 12:11:05 UTC 2005


Ralph Meijer schrieb:

>On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 02:45:56AM +0100, Sebastiaan Deckers wrote:
>  
>
>>Use compression: http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0138.html
>>It'll most likely provide a better compression ratio and it has the 
>>advantage of not making the traffic unreadable.
>>And it doesn't require a complete overhaul of just about every piece of 
>>XMPP software out there already. :-)
>>    
>>
>
>Amen.
>  
>
So be it for now ... For future versions of XMPP (i.e. 1.1) the 
replacement of the long tag names should be considered nonetheless.

Right now i am in a work group where we calculate and test with 500k 
concurrent connections in a jabber cluster. Those long tag names 
increase our traffic by the factor 4-5 approximately. We, in our 
scenario with the current specs, would produce about 6-10 Terrabyte of 
traffic per month, with compression propably something like 2-7Tb, with 
shorter tag names approx. 1-2.

I do not agree on the readability:
<m t='uls at jabber.org' f='cerberus at jabber.org'><b>looks good</b></m>
isn't really hard to read...

But yes, for now we try to use compression where possible.


Cheers,
Ulrich




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20051120/dce343a0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: us.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 329 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20051120/dce343a0/attachment.vcf>


More information about the Standards mailing list