Raffaele, First, I would firgure out the max number of concurrent users of your application. If it's not more than a couple hundred, you should just use Smack or JSO (one client per connection) and not worry about it further. However, there are certainly cases where one connection per client in the app-server just won't cut it. We've run into this problem when trying to make our web-based group chat client scale to a large number of users.
To address this exact problem, we've started up Project Pampero: http://www.jivesoftware.org/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=48. The overall theme is to bring a much higher level of scalability to Jive Messenger. As part of that effort we'll define an extension to the component JEP to make it possible to aggregate multiple clients on a single TCP/IP connection (which makes it possible to to have a two-tier connection manager architecture). Once we've created that protocol and support it in Jive Messenger, we'd also like to support it in Smack. That should accomplish exactly what you're looking for. There's no schedule on when any of this will be done, but you're more than welcome to join our effort. :) As another (partial) approach -- you can get presence information for users over HTTP when using the Jive Messenger presence service plugin. You can either get a user's presence as an image for easy integration into existing pages, or get it as XML (REST style web service). I know that other servers have similar functionality. Download of the plugin is at: http://www.jivesoftware.org/messenger/plugins.jsp Regards, Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raffaele Sena > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 8:51 PM > To: jdev@jabber.org > Subject: [jdev] Integrating XMPP with enterprise applications > > > Hello, > > I am struggling with a problem and I thought of asking your opinion. > > I want to use a Jabber/XMPP server for an enterprise > application but I want a much stricter integration that > simply hosting an IM server on the same network with my application. > > I want to add presence and possibly chat and other messanging > capabilities to my application so that information and > conversations can be shared between the application and the > XMPP server. > > These are some of the use cases: > > - a user is accessing the application via a rich internet client. > - The application should send presence information to the > XMPP server. > - The application should send presence information from the > XMPP server to the rich internet client > > - the application or the rich internet client offer some sort > of chat capabilities (peer to peer and multichat) > - Users in the chat should appear as users in the XMPP server > - The application should send chat messages to the XMPP server > - The application should forward messages (sent by regular > XMPP clients) from the XMPP server to the rich internet clients > > The "standard" (and easy way) of doing this is by either > embedding an XMPP client in my rich internet clients (but my > application server will have no visibility of the XMPP > traffic) or by using one of the available client libraries > and have the application server open one XMPP connection to > the XMPP server for each one of the rich internet clients. > Both these solutions seems pretty heavy to me. > > What I would really like to do is have a single connection > between the application server and the XMPP server and some > state information in the application server for the connected > clients. I thought that I could use the server-to-server > protocol to talk between the application server and the XMPP > server but there is no standard "server" library available > (JSO seems to support have some support for s2s but there are > no examples of how to use it). > > I may just bite the bullet and write my own library or > dissect an XMPP server and take some code for there but first > I thought I would ask on this forum if this seems to be a > valuable solution (or there is some better or more "standard" > way of doing this ?). > > Any comment is appreciated. > > Thanks! > > -- Raffaele Sena > > >
