Wed, 15 Feb 2017 08:48:38 +0100 "Ruslan N. Marchenko" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't say load-balancing is corner case, merely suggest that > load-balancing from non-suitable components is a corner case. > Loadbalancing xmpp (or smpt, or SIP) with http-proxy - *is* a corner > case. Ideally I'd like loadbalancer to offload both tls and stream > negotiation, to filter out stream-flood (similar to syn-flood) - eg. > pass/relay connection to the pool only once initial handshake is > complete (stream/to + tls/SAN). But we don't have these tools. XMPP is a "niche" protocol, load-balancers authors don't even consider it. What should we do? Sit and wait for someone to write them in the future and transition them to a mature state like nginx or haproxy? Currently the XEP allows us to reuse high-quality existing tools, which is awesome. > Precisely >From what I read, your position is: - Let's keep redundant cycles, because they are not very redundant. - Let's wait for better load balancers. - We should not try to bypass restrictive proxies. All these arguments, are, frankly, not very convincing. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
