[Standards-JIG] proto-JEP: Smart Presence Distribution
melo at co.sapo.pt
Wed May 17 22:17:33 UTC 2006
On May 17, 2006, at 9:25 PM, Michal vorner Vaner wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:29:22PM +0200, Carlo v. Loesch wrote:
> Alright, if it is really the issue jabber would not survive and we
> to spent a long time debuging, the OK. But it could be without
> the whole XMPP-CORE and XMPP-IM and without the relaying on the
> synced roster.
You are not breaking anything: two parties are negotiating an
extension between them that allows them to be more efficient. It
doesn't affect anybody else.
I believe that this is what the X in XMPP is all about: new solutions
for problems we have (and from reading the list it seems that we
don't even have consensus on this part) can be introduced later as
long as they are properly negotiated between the parties involved.
> The idea with each server having a multicast component and keeping the
> list for some time would do the job, if there would be something
> unsynchronized, it would get corrected by time, just after the list
> timed out, it could be done to both presence and messages (possibly
> the same lists, which can be used in MUC).
While I think that the multicast service would allow to do multicast
between servers, it does not solve the problem.
The problem is that nothing right now, with or without this proto-
jep, guarantees us that the roster of both parties will be in sync.
If we want to solve the problem, solve that one. Let's create some
sort of protocol that would allow rosters to be in sync.
This would solve the real problem.
HIId: Pedro Melo
SMTP: melo at co.sapo.pt
XMPP: pedro.melo at sapo.pt
More information about the Standards