On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Dan Morrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, that's the background to the story. Thanks for reading this far! A > standard for XMPP optimized for mobile would obviously be a very big deal > for more than just Android, and we will be excited to see one come together. > Since we are deep in our 1.0 release cycle, I don't know how actively we'll > be able to contribute to this process. However, you folks seem to already > be aware of the problems we faced -- and hopefully now we've made them even > clearer.
Thanks a lot for for your post which casts light on the requirements in real world for mobile XMPP. As you have said we were already aware of some of the problems, while for it's very interesting to discover that in your tests zlib seemed adding more problems to the battery issues than the advantages in bandwidth savings. If this is confirmed we will have the same problem with EXI, since it still relies on zlib for compressing the binary stream (otherwise you have little gains). However we think that a great part of the overhead comes from a verbose stream initialization process, and from the lack of optimization in the roster and presence distribution. This can be easily solved, while for binary compressed stream we will need some more data before reaching consensus on a solution. If you just could provide some feedback about what we might conceive and perhaps you have already tested on your hardware, that would be of great help to the whole community. Besides I was wandering which is your experience in long lived socket connections, which are required by XMPP. We have experienced that they cause more problems than xml and the lack of compression: just leaving a socket open without doing traffic halves the life of the batteries and even worse... Do you have the same experience? Thanks a lot again for you intervention -- Fabio Forno, Ph.D. Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com jabber id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
