[Standards] distributed MUC rooms

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Sun Jun 10 17:07:49 UTC 2007

On Saturday 09 June 2007 10:42 am, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 09-06-2007, sob o godzinie 09:36 -0700, Justin Karneges napisał(a):
> > Wouldn't it be enough to just use a good, distributed XMPP server
> > deployment,
> > that also supports distributed MUC internally?  Additionally,
> > distribution is
> > a hot topic, and everyone has different internal approaches
> > (including
> > special wire protocols between nodes).  Just read any blog about
> > ejabberd.
> That would enforce ejabberd on every deployment that wants to join the
> distributed MUC environment.
> I'm afraid that would make very unhappy the ones that don't think
> ejabberd is the best thing right after the bread and butter...

I was referring to an internally distributed MUC owned by a single entity.  
Nobody would "join" the distributed MUC environment.  The owner of the MUC 
could deploy more nodes, but that's all.  In this case, a proprietary 
clustering protocol is perfectly acceptable (whether ejabberd or not, it was 
just an example).


More information about the Standards mailing list