Boyd,
The test was done without TLS using localDNS.
Michael
On Feb 14, 2008 8:57 PM, Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL J9935 <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> With or without TLS enabled?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: XMPP Extension Discussion List <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thu Feb 14 14:52:55 2008
> Subject: Re: [Standards]binary XML (was: Re: [jdev] Google Androïd SDK not
> XMPP compliant ?)
>
> We have tested XMPP (with zlib compression) over radio links (<9.6 kB) and
> found that chat is not too bad. The biggest problem was the TCP connection
> and SASL authentication (too many handshakes). It takes up to 3 minutes to
> connect/reconnect which is not acceptable.
>
> Cheers
> Michael
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>        Alexander Gnauck wrote:
>        > Fabio Forno schrieb:
>        >
>        >> ...
>        >> - compression is not as bad as I thought and if time to market
> is
>        >> essential that's the only viable solution
>        > see also my comments in the jdev thread, I think we should all
> hop one
>        > one thread ;-)
>        > http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/jdev/2008-February/026157.html
>        >
>        > I have done lots of mobile programming and tests in the past. And
> it
>        > really performs very well. ZLib does not need much CPU and the
>        > compression ratio with XMPP XML is amazing.
>
>        IMHO we'll never get people to stop thinking that XML is verbose.
> It's
>        one of those memes that will never go away.
>
>        > When somebody wants to have this binary Xml, which I think is not
> a bad
>        > idea, then plug it into XEP-0138.
>
>        Correct. Boyd Fletcher volunteered to write the small spec for this
>        (basically just like XEP-0229 except defining the use of binary
> XML),
>        but nothing has been submitted yet.
>
>        Peter
>
>        --
>        Peter Saint-Andre
>        https://stpeter.im/
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to