Hello On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 04:50:15PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > > Hello > > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 04:39:46PM -0500, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: > >> The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. > >> > >> Title: Requirements for IM File Transfer > > > > May I add that it is sometime desirable to transfer large files, > > How large is "large"? Just curious! > > I didn't address file size at all in the requirements yet, but I think > it may help to think about what we mean by "large" and "small". I have > heard of some companies where it is not rare for an email attachment to > be 2G!
I was already sending a CD image to someone, I may want to send a DVD. I do not want any restriction on the size, actually, only my internet connection - not of my server/whoever else. Actually, the current file transfer works for them without problems (some clients has problems with larger than 2G files and they show the size wrong, causing the progressbar unusable, but transfered them well). > > so they > > must go "trough" and not get saved as whole somewhere. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "go through and not get saved as a whole > somewhere". Does that mean the file never even exists on the sender's > device, that it doesn't get stored in the middle somewhere? It doesn't get stored in the middle, noone will not let me store it, if it is so large and it will take a long time to upload, then long time to download. If it is not stored, then it is only one long time to transfer. > And part of what we need to consider is how many potential recipients > there might be. If there are lots of recipients, a technology like > torrent is probably more appropriate. -- Fragile. Do not turn umop ap1sdn! Michal 'vorner' Vaner
pgpgAfqsKJ5Ge.pgp
Description: PGP signature
