[Standards] Link-Lokal Messaging and PEP?
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.
More information about the Standards