Thanks Alexis! I responded to Mike on the blog. In short -- chaining of hubs would not require changing the protocol, just the types of components which implement parts of the protocol. Instead of having just pure publishers, subscribers and hubs, there would be components that implement multiple roles (e.g. a hub that supports chaining would be both a hub and a subscriber). As Jeff said - this can all be broken down to webhooks.
Regular PSHB subscription would still work as before. Publishing/filtering would just be an extension which a hub MAY support. Of course, this requires some kind of fallback negotiation for cases when a component doesn't support an extension requested by another component. Ivan On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 19:21, Alexis Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > Ivan, all, > > Mike Bridgen has elaborated on this in the comments to the post. > > I am copying his comments here: > > --- > > pubsubhubbub (0.1, anyway) doesn’t chain together in the way you’ve > illustrated, because it’s not symmetrical — hubs don’t get subscribed > to other hubs (or indeed, subscribe themselves). While you wouldn’t > have to change the protocol, you would have to change the idea of what > a hub is. But I guess you are setting out to do that anyway. > > For processing I can subscribe the remote processing service to the > hub, and subscribe myself to the remote processor. Taking into account > the verification, it would probably go > 1. Me -> Remote: Please give me a token for this hub to post to you > 2. Me -> Remote: Please subscribe me to you > 3. Me -> Hub: Please subscribe Remote using this token > This requires me and the remote processing service to understand some > generalised bits of PSHB, but nothing extra of the hub (I don’t > think). > > --- > > Cheers, > > alexis > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Alexis Richardson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ivan >> >> Possibly related to what Jeff says: how do you think hub-hub chaining works? >> >> Separately does PSHB subscription still work in your model? >> >> Great article btw. >> >> alexis >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Jeff Lindsay <[email protected]> wrote: >>> You should look into the greater webhooks ecosystem (slowly being called the >>> Evented Web). It's all about the things your talking about here. >>> http://webhooks.org >>> Of particular interest might be Scriptlets (currently undergoing a major >>> upgrade) and DrEval. >>> -jeff >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Ivan Žužak <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Just wanted to point to my new blog post - http://bit.ly/5PMXGq. In >>>> short, it's about extending PSHB to support not only real-time >>>> delivery of feeds but also their filtering and processing via 3rd >>>> party services. As I write in the post, I've discussed some of these >>>> ideas a few months back with Julien (over email) and Brett (over >>>> FriendFeed) but never got around to starting a broader discussion with >>>> concrete ideas. >>>> >>>> Feedback is welcome and if it's mostly positive I think that would be >>>> a good signal to start defining an extension to the protocol which >>>> supports this. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Ivan >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jeff Lindsay >>> http://webhooks.org -- Make the web more programmable >>> http://shdh.org -- A party for hackers and thinkers >>> http://tigdb.com -- Discover indie games >>> http://progrium.com -- More interesting things >>> >> >
