Dnia 17-10-2007, Śr o godzinie 13:05 -0700, Mark Doliner pisze: > Doesn't this make the router a bottleneck?
Router has almost no logic - it only passes packets through. I'm worried more about the fact that it is a single point of failure. We may introduce router mesh. Set of interconnected routers that exchange their routing information. A router receiving bound name advertisement records it in the routing table. Same for routing method (domain/bare-jid/full-jid) change requests when connected router detects conflict. Example: sm1 - router1 - router2 - sm2 router1 table: sm1 1111 router2 2222 sm2 * 2222 - advertisement record (presence from component) router2 table: sm2 1234 router1 2345 sm1 * 2345 - advertisement record (presence from component) > Creating a clustering component [...] I don't like the idea of introducing yet another component in the puzzle. The clustering functionality should be handled in the router. > Also, when would sm bind to a bare jid? When the router detects bind conflict. It tells the conflicting components to "go to the lower level". > how does c2s decide which sm instance to forward the login to? C2S needs changes in the SM tracking logic. When it receives advertisements of bare-jids, it starts routing by bare-jids, not domain. Same for full-jids. -- /\_./o__ Tomasz Sterna (/^/(_^^' Xiaoka.com ._.(_.)_ XMPP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Jabberd2 mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xiaoka.com/listinfo.cgi/jabberd2-xiaoka.com
