[Standards] Could anyone using XMPP-0277 or PEP help us test our Onesocialweb implementation ?

Laurent Eschenauer laurent at eschenauer.be
Sun Apr 18 08:06:41 UTC 2010

> I have built a XEP-0277 client (android) and I am interested in the
> implementation itself. For basic interoperability is only XEP-0277 required?
That would be the aim, but I'm sure that at this stage, we have some
proprietary stuff laying here in there. We are not actively tesisting
against this requirement at this stage. So, I propose you to just get going,
and ping us with issues. Best is to do this on the onesocialweb mailing as
other devs may help as well.

> Also, does your Openfire plugin implement XEP-0277 (plus more), the roadmap
> page on the website doesn’t seem to say.
Yes, although at this stage it is a bit of a hack. So you can't do full
pubsub on that node, but publishing and querying works. All this is work in
progress, so feel free to jump in and provide feedback. If you don't want to
install your own openfire + plugin, I can provide accounts on the test
server (this proposal is of course open to anyone).

> My feeling is that XEP-0277 doesn’t scale well, especially with PEP and
> frequently reconnecting mobile clients in the mix. In particular the
> rebroadcasting of messages (for example the replies to A that get
> broadcasted to everyone subscribed to A no matter if they are interested in
> that thread) creates a lot of traffic (and noise) on larger implementations.
> You can see what would happen with a large implementation.
All this is early stage thinking. We'll implement this in the coming weeks,
test it, and happily iterate if required. I'm sure solutions can be found,
there is a lot of stuff in the xmpp toolbox to deal with this kind of

Thank you for this feedback. I encourage you to get down to the code, try
stuff, and continue the conversation while implementing bits and pieces.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20100418/30e80fee/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list