[Standards] Link-Lokal Messaging and PEP?
sjoerd at luon.net
Sat Mar 31 09:05:52 UTC 2007
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 04:56:28PM +0200, Robert McQueen wrote:
> Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> > For publishing stuff to your contacts, it seems much more natural to me to
> > DNS-SD. Which is much more efficient in spreading knowledge in the network.
> > Can't give you an easy answer on how to convert PEP nodes to TXT record
> > or maybe if we should even use one service per PEP node, although that feels
> > like a hack (Announce a service purely for information).
> Surely the most direct mapping of PEP to llXMPP is to provide a mapping
> of entity capabilities into mDNS records (by analogue to <c> nodes in
> <presence>)? Then discoing/caching proceeds as normal, and other
> PEP-using clients know who to notify about updated PEP nodes based on
> the existence of the XMLNS+notify capability, in the same way that
> servers behave with PEP.
My point wasn't about the difficulty of translating PEP for usage in xep-0174.
Which is obviously quite easy.
My point was that the notification part isn't very efficient. As soon as there
is some PEP thingy thata most clients support, want a notification for and is
updated quite regularely you'll get a lot of babbling on your network.
Especially considering that we're already using dns-sd which is quite efficient
in spreading information about the existence of nodes (services) and optionally
information (TXT records).
But maybe i'm just overly paranoid about network usage :)..
One has to look out for engineers -- they begin with sewing machines
and end up with the atomic bomb.
-- Marcel Pagnol
More information about the Standards