Hi, On 2010-01-29 22:24 UTC chiang wrote: > Sounds like if servers, clustered or not, can make sure that waves > initiated from their domain are always available then everything will > be okay. Does that mean that all wave providers, including home set > up ones, need to be given strict "guidelines" to set their servers > up to some standard before they can be allowed to federate? As I can > see the detrimental effects dodgy master wave servers will have on > waves contributed by multiple parties. And this is far from just a > not-yet implemented feature don't you think?
This definitely needs to be thought through. Consider an unreliable XMPP server (used for traditional instant messaging) - it causes inconvenience for everyone who uses that server, and eventually those users will switch to a more reliable one. Since conversations are logged by the client, the user doesn't lose his conversation history. Now consider an unreliable Wave server - when it goes down, its users can neither communicate/write while it's down, nor access their previous conversations/documents/photo albums/and whatever else Wave will be used for. So, if Waves can never "change their master server", users will need ultimate trust into their Wave server provider (not unlike with other cloud services). Maybe a convenient way to make (offline readable) backups of Waves would help a bit here. As for Wave participants on other servers: even if the master server is down, the Wave must be available in read-only mode. Patrick. -- Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
