Propably we need two top level protocols, one for 1-to-1 chat and one for Conference chat.
we need to find a common ground.


why not come from the use case side?

Media conferencing:
-> one to one
-> multi partner conference

are these two use cases agreeable? i hope so.

now we come to the next use cases:

one to one
-> establish a session
   -> ring partner
   -> agree on a transmission approach with user
   -> transmit data
-> leave a session
   -> graceful session leave
   -> shut down socket


multi partner conferences
-> find a session (through browsing server)
-> create a session
-> leave a session
-> mute a user [please, not that p2p discussion on recieving and sending 100 streams to/from multiple users]
-> kick a user
-> ban a user
-> etc. [see MUC use cases]






is this agreeable upon?



u




Richard Dobson wrote:


Well, this was my view and about where it was in the previous argument -


one


protocol to spool them all, one protocol to find them...



One protocol would be fine but we must ensure that a combined p2p and client-server protocol does not end up actually being more complex than just having two protocols.

Richard

_______________________________________________
jdev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev





_______________________________________________
jdev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev

Reply via email to