Michael F Lin wrote:
> Let's imagine for a moment that you, an average user with JID user@server,
> wanted to run an AIM gateway for others to use. How do messages for any
> arbirtary AIM user get routed to you? "Simple", you say, "just have other
> people send their messages to user@server/screenname, then I'll just pick
> the screenname off of the incoming XML and forward it along."
>
> But there's a clear problem in this, in that in the current implementation
> this would require you to have an open session for all possible AIM
> screennames. Obviously, this is not acceptable.
>
> So how do our transports get around this? Well, just that: they sidestep
> the problem. By requiring special configuration on the server, they simply
> make their JID "server" only, and as a result all messages to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be routed to them.
> We believe this is a good solution to our problem because it is reasonably
> compatible with the existing standard: it affects only the failure case,
> where a packet that would otherwise have been bounced may now be
> successfully delivered; success cases are entirely unaffected, since they
> currently depend on an exact match of the resource. The implementation of
> this small routing change will allow the Jabber ID to be used to address
> any conceivable service without special knowledge from the server.
>
this is an interesting idea. i'm not sure if i really like how it solves
the problem or not yet, but i know the DotGNU people may be interested
in this, since they are wanting to do something similar with their own
addressing scheme, and i'm trying to convince them to use jabber.
_______________________________________________
jdev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
