[Standards] Re: About stream namespaces
Carlo v. Loesch
CvL at mail.symlynX.com
Sat Mar 17 16:46:37 UTC 2007
Alexander Gnauck typeth:
| why do you use our technology if it's that bad?
why do you use the telephone if you have jingle?
and i'm not carrying on a black or white discussion here.
a lot of work that has been done on XMPP is quite impressive,
unfortunately it is based on a flaky fundament.
| Jabber was designed to be simple and extensible.
almost every protocol tries to do that, and concerning the
simplicity jabber and psyc both failed in different ways.
concerning the extensibility both are doing rather fine.
| And ejabberd shows you that it also scales very well. The discussion
| about XML is absolutely senseless.
i don't see any proof in scalability in a few thousand users.
and why is a single server instance any proof of scalability if
the problem of scalability resides in the S2S protocol and thus
in the "federation" network itself? no one is even argueing
about the scalability of a single implementation.. it is mostly
pointless really. the system must scale as a whole, and it won't.
you can't forever throw bandwidth at the redundant messages and
inefficient distributions. irc already went that same path, and
look were it got.. a thousand scattered subnets.
| If Jeremie wanted to design a high performance and ultimative scalable
| system he would have done it. Please stop this discussion.
no one can design the ultimate something alone anyway.
what kind of arguement is this?
also i didn't plan to start a discussion.
what's so much to be discussed about facts?
More information about the Standards