[Standards] Link-Lokal Messaging and PEP?

Andreas Monitzer jig at monitzer.com
Sat Mar 31 12:19:31 UTC 2007


On Mar 31, 2007, at 11:05, Sjoerd Simons wrote:

> 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 :)..

Well, that's exactly why I wrote this thread's initial mail. Imagine  
being on a busy student network, where 100 people are using some kind  
of bonjour-based XMPP client. If one of your PEP nodes changes, the  
client would have to establish 100 short-lived TCP connections to 100  
locations. If this happens regularly (like once every minute), I  
wouldn't be surprised when the admins would boot you off the network  
under the suspicion of using bittorrent.
Additionally, this would be required when logging in.

andy




More information about the Standards mailing list