[Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compression

Jonathan Chayce Dickinson chayce.za at gmail.com
Thu Aug 30 10:54:24 UTC 2007


They do have a testing framework out, I'm not sure what that is. It's 
too big for me to download. Maybe someone could download it and evaluate 
how well the format works.

<http://www.w3.org/XML/EXI/framework/exi-ttfms.zip>

Boyd Fletcher wrote:
> I was thinking we would just add it to XEP-138 instead of writing a new XEP.
> 
> I believe some of the folks on the W3 committee are working on an
> implementation of EXI.
> 
> 
> On 8/29/07 6:52 PM, "Joe Hildebrand" <hildjj at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2007, at 7:00 AM, Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL
>> J9935 wrote:
>>
>>>> Speaking of compression, I think we should consider adding the w3's
>>>> efficient xml interchange (exi) support to xep-138. The testing
>>>> results I've seen for EXI indicate that in many circumstances it is
>>>> quite a bit better than zlib or tls compression. In addition to
>>>> better b/w utilization use of exi within the xmpp router could
>>>> potentially lead to dramatically improved scalability as binary xml
>>>> is far more efficient to process.
>> You should write a XEP, then, that defines the compression method
>> name, a pointer to the relevant W3C doc, and the XMPP Registrar
>> Considerations that asks the registrar to add it to the list of
>> compression methods.
>>
>> Off-topic: are there any open source implementations of EXI yet?
>>
>> --
>> Joe Hildebrand
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
jonathan chayce dickinson
ruby/c# developer

cell:   +27741863698
email:  chayce.za at gmail.com
jabber: moitoi at inflecto.org

<some profound piece of wisdom>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 6974 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070830/10817a59/attachment.bin>


More information about the Standards mailing list