[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Jingle HTTP File Transfer

Sean Egan seanegan at gmail.com
Tue Feb 13 00:03:51 UTC 2007


On 2/12/07, JD Conley <jd.conley at coversant.net> wrote:
> It also doesn't look particularly good at requirement #1 ("This protocol
> must work everywhere, regardless of network topology"). XEP-0065 is
> heaps better with a proxied connection. I'm actually a bit foggy on the
> necessity of this HTTP Jingle profile.

This protocol is just for the Content description of a Jingle session.
 Since a Jingle session contains a 'content type' (what gets
transferred between two peers) and a 'transport type' (how it gets
transferred), this describes only half of a reliable file transfer
session. We can then use a variant of the Jingle ICE transport to
provide a reliable, robust connection, on top of which this HTTP
description provides a very rich file transfer experience.

The reliable variant of ICE is something I'm still working on
documenting (I'm documenting a simpler version of the protocol Google
Talk uses for it)

-s.



More information about the Standards mailing list