[Standards-JIG] Re: MUC traffic issues

Bob Wyman bob at wyman.us
Sun Feb 19 23:33:01 UTC 2006

Alexander Gnauck wrote:
> I only took MUC to address this issue because its the most common
> component distributing stanzas one -> many. Its the same with
> presence over s2s, pubsub and other protocols.
	As I recently mentioned in another message, at PubSub.com we often
see individual messages that match 10's of thousands of subscriptions. If we
were to support S2S, we would be pumping many, many duplicate copies of
messages across the S2S connection just so that we could get the addressing
information to the other servers -- the copied message bodies would be a
pure waste of bandwidth. If we could prepare a single message which had just
one copy of the message attached to a list of all the addresses and subids
that should get a copy of the message, we would save massive amounts of
bandwidth. (The messages that we send are much larger than traditional MUC
messages -- our messages range from a few hundred bytes to a few hundred
thousand bytes. Thus, the savings are significant.)

	bob wyman

More information about the Standards mailing list