[Standards-JIG] Client Capabilities (rant)

Chris Mullins chris.mullins at coversant.net
Sun Nov 20 23:14:39 UTC 2005


Tomasz Sterna Wrote:
> 2005/11/20, Chris Mullins <chris.mullins at coversant.net>:
> > For the case of a large roster, with most or all users 
> > running the same client version, it's a clear win. 
> > For all other use cases it's not a win, and in some 
> > cases it's a large loss.

> Why do you think so?

If a client lists a number of EXT values, then we need to make a disco
info request for each ext value. This increases the number of disco
requests.

If I only have 1 client in my roster, and that person has 10 ext items,
it will take me 11 requests go get all their features. One request for
the base node (client#version), and 10 additional requests (one for each
ext item). 

If I have two users in my roster, and they're on different clients, and
each lists 10 ext items, then I'm making 22 disco info requests. 

If I have two users in my roster, but on different versions of the same
client, then I'm still making 22 disco info requests. 

It's not until we have a roster with multiple users all running the same
version of the same client that we start to see a lowering of disco info
requests. 

Now, if we cache values across sessions that we see a dramatic falloff
in disco requests, but the JEP doesn't mention that, and I don't know of
any clients that do it (although I haven't looked for that either).

-- 
Chris Mullins




More information about the Standards mailing list