More reasons why XMPP is better with BOSH. :)

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:06:54 -0500
From: Winterbottom, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Paul Kyzivat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Simple] XMPP vs SIMPLE

I might throw in a bit of heresy here too.
XMPP over BOSH works just great through my corporate firewall and
web-proxy and the IS guys are none-the-wiser. If I were to move to SIP,
well.....

*8)...

I know this isn't a composition comment, but it is an access to the
service issue.

Cheers
James


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
> Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 October 2008 8:55 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Simple] XMPP vs SIMPLE
> 
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am a Masters in Computer Science student working on a project that
> > compares XMPP and SIMPLE as presence protocols. Specifically, I am
> looking
> > at Rich Presence, the aggregation of presence information from
various
> > assorted devices belonging to the same individual to provide a
single
> and
> > consistent user presence. I want to determine which is the better
> protocol
> > for Rich Presence.
> >
> > My question is: Is it possible that the UDP version of SIMPLE could
be
> > more bandwidth efficient than XMPP over TCP for the conveyance of
> presence
> > information? Evidently SIMPLE is more verbose than XMPP, however UDP
is
> a
> > much lighter transport layer protocol than TCP.
> 
> Its quite likely that the UDP form of SIMPLE isn't viable for
presence,
> for a couple of reasons:
> - if the presence document is big enough to push the NOTIFY
>    message over the PDU size, then you can't use UDP
> 
> - you probably want the security of TLS for presence.
> 
> So arguing for SIP over XMPP based on use of UDP isn't a great
argument.
> 
>       Good Luck,
>       Paul
> 
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Anisa Ragalo,
> > MSc Student,
> > Department of Computer Science,
> > University of Cape Town.
> >
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cellphone: +27760335309
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Simple mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


Reply via email to