[Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-0124: comments on proposed version 1.5

Matt Tucker matt at jivesoftware.com
Tue May 9 18:58:10 UTC 2006


We'd like to get an initial round of feedback from Peter and then do one
quick rev of the JEP ourselves before making it "public". However, I'll
drop you an email to send an earlier version before then.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: standards-jig-bounces at jabber.org 
> [mailto:standards-jig-bounces at jabber.org] On Behalf Of 
> Jean-Louis Seguineau
> Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 10:26 AM
> To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> Subject: RE: [Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-0124: comments on 
> proposed version 1.5
> Hi Matt, 
> >From your short description, how different would this be from an S2S
> connector working within the same domain? I see a lot of 
> leverage we could gain taking this approach against the more 
> disparate existing 'component'
> connections. Most of the stream and authentication 
> implementation could be re-used, don't you believe/
> Do you have a link to your initial proposal?
> Jean-Louis
> -----Original Message-----
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 10:26:38 -0500
> From: "Matt Tucker" <matt at jivesoftware.com>
> Subject: RE: [Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-0124: comments on proposed
> 	version 1.5
> To: "Jabber protocol discussion list" <standards-jig at jabber.org>
> Message-ID:
> <E1F190DAC247C64FAA46B38316FA151D03D92D3D at EX-101.mail.navisite.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> Ian,
> We've submitted an initial proposal to PSA for a generic 
> "multi-stream"
> or "connection manager" (as we call it) protocol. It's 
> largely similar to the external component protocol, but with 
> SASL, TLS, and a few extras thrown in. This is part of our 
> "Pampero" project for greatly increased scalability in Wildfire.
> We definitely agree that a cross-server protocol for 
> connection managers or multi-stream is the best approach. It 
> will allow proxies to work with any server as well as give 
> the XMPP protocol fundamentally better scalability. Our own 
> implementation of the protocol will be in the next several 
> months and we're attempting to work with some other server 
> implementers to see it more widely adopted.
> Regards,
> Matt

More information about the Standards mailing list