ya - Looking over the pirate pad, I'm still not sure a p2p based requirement for a wave system is going to be more simple to implement. Scalability and path finding issues come into play. (even traditional p2p networks use central servers, torrents etc to help clients find eachother). Then you get into storage/security issues when handily private data.
Nathanael Abbotts ConcurrentTreeColdStorage (https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1iKiZJhtYBNrl8gm0A7rnjFyLwqBXtRvVFo6AJS0XcYw/edit?hl=en_GB&authkey=CPDB2IQH) seems a neat solution for anominious (ie, no login) private access to documents, but Im not sure how scalable it is. If you have 10,000 documents and potentially thousands of participants, wouldn't it need to check each key against each doc...on each client with the data? And how would realtime updates work :? How would you invite someone to a doc when they arnt online? (that is, how would you get the "key" to them) Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stickwith how its working - as I've said, I'll be more usefull client side then any server side stuff. Maybe other people with more knowledge of this stuff can weigh in here? Still, if the goal is to make wave easier to implement, I think adding p2p wont work to that end - it will only make writing a client more complex. [/2 and a bit cents] The other thing...to everyone on this thread....is it possible to work on client/server and sever/server protocols at the same time? If there is really going to be big changes to the server side, wont this mess up any client/server communications requirements? I'm very keen to get a working c/s protocol, but at the same time, I want to target my freetime where its more usefull and dont fancy trying to (yet again) develop for another moving target thats going to be useless in a few months. (as what happened to both FedOne and PygoWave). -Thomas [/keen to get on with actual coding] ~~~~~~ Reviews of anything, by anyone; www.rateoholic.co.uk Please try out my new site and give feedback :) On 12 June 2011 23:56, ya knygar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello! > > according to the latest talks about rethinking the Federation protocols > Were created a federation working group pad: > > http://piratepad.net/HET5ojzCXM > > briefly named - "Call for Participation in building a Federative > XMPP-Wave-OT Social Networking Consortium" > > please, participate as much as possible in any of these fields, especially > in a new protocol draft - reviewing that was discussed above. > > it highly depends on all interested Apache Wave members help, to make > that Federation and, probably, Wave Consortium a reality, > > at least for Wave alike servers, we as a PyOfWave team are keen on it > for a long time now, doing all what was possible to projects - follow > that WaveProtocol.org standards and relate to Apache Wave as a > reference implementation. We understand that - there was a busy - > transferring and infrastructure uprising time - for WIAB, > however - there is a high demand for changes in protocol, as you can > see on that pad, we have done our best for creating a Wave Consortium > community again, so, it's your turn to help. > > Thanks in advance. >
