[Standards] e2e compression

Tobias Markmann tmarkmann at googlemail.com
Wed Sep 5 15:37:59 UTC 2007


Therefore we would need a XMPP-over-Jingle XEP. ;)

On 9/5/07, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
>
> Jonathan Chayce Dickinson wrote:
> > Has anyone thought of using end-to-end compression? Look at the
> > following example:
> >
> > john-->myserver.org-->hisserver.org-->fred
> >
> > Now if we look at what happens when a message is sent:
> >
> > john-->compress-->myserver.org-->decompress-->interpret-->
> > compress-->hisserver.org-->decompress-->interpret-->compress-->
> > fred-->decompress
> >
> > As opposed to (with e2e compression):
> >
> > john-->compress-->myserver.org-->interpret-->hisserver.org-->
> > interpret-->fred-->decompress
> >
> > Obviously only the payload would be compressed, the stanza would
> > need to stay intact. Much simpler algorithms could then be used on the
> > servers that explicitly deal with compressing XML efficiently.
> >
> > I know this has the potential to be a terrible idea...
>
> Not necessarily. But if people really need this, it seems better to
> negotiate a direct TCP connection between the two entities (via Jingle),
> encrypt that connection using TLS, agree to compress it using TLS or
> XEP-0138 compression, and then exchange whatever data is desired over
> that connection.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070905/114e483a/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list