On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 10:10, Adrian German wrote: > One last question would be about the relative performance of compressed > HTTP vs. technologies currently used for Instant Messaging such as > Jabber. I know that this is too general but I'd be very interested to > know if (in your experience, or just in your opinion) Jabber-like > technologies are clearly superior, or clearly inferior, or simply not > comparable with compressed HTTP for the kind of applications mentioned > above (ministations in the field connecting to server periodically and > transmitting data). I thank you in advance and am looking forward to any > replies.
There's been a fair bit of work done at my job site on Jabber wrapped in Ruby - http://rubyforge.org/projects/jabber4r/ - to connect to servers and send status messages for a distributed agent society - http://cougaar.org/. The status messages we're sending around are usually pretty small - they top out at about 20K - so this may not be comparable to what your doing. FWIW, I think Jabber might add a bit more complexity then you need - Jabber is a messaging protocol and so it's tuned for little messages flying all over the place. What you're doing sounds like a good match for the things you suggested - compressed HTTP, zipped SMTP as Serge suggested, or maybe even FTP. Yours, tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
