[Standards] switching between BOSH and TCP?
melo at simplicidade.org
Sat Mar 29 19:51:16 UTC 2008
On Mar 28, 2008, at 5:46 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> I've been chatting with someone off-list about mobile optimizations
> he suggested that we might want to build in the ability to seamlessly
> switch between BOSH and TCP. For example you would use the TCP binding
> when you have a high volume of activity (active chat sessions with
> multiple contacts, Jingle negotiation, etc.) but then go back to BOSH
> when the activity level drops below some threshold.
> So a few questions:
> 1. Is BOSH acceptable in practice for high-activity periods?
This is more a meta-reply to several posts on this thread that argue
that BOSH is more heavy (bandwidth-wise) than TCP.
Sure, you have all the HTTP headers going back and forth, and the SSL/
But we should not assume constant pooling in our decisions. A BOSH CM
could implement a long-lived HTTP connection (like the ones used by
the Comet-style protocols) and with a short delay on response (to
accumulate stanzas), it should be pretty good. Not as good as TCP
sure, but enough to weight against the BOSH ability of keeping a XMPP
session alive in the presence of changing client IP address.
XMPP ID: melo at simplicidade.org
More information about the Standards