

AIM  Google Talk Federation now live - zacwest
http://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/2011-May/010360.html

======
gst
I don't know if this is related, but the SRV record _xmpp-server._tcp.aol.com
resolves to xmpp.gxmpp.oscar.aol.com.

Might it be possible that AIM will also federate with other XMPP servers?

~~~
lloeki
I hope it does, as it might help XMPP take off as a federated network, and not
as merely the foundation of GTalk implementation. I wish Yahoo, MSN Messenger
and Skype (for IM) would do the same.

------
jmspring
I was wondering why Adium kept saying "X@aol.com" wishes to converse with you.
I've been getting spammed by this for a few days now. Not sure how this prompt
is being triggered, but these aren't people I normally chat with, just people
in my email.

It feels a lot like logging into a yahoo account and having a dozen or so
chatbots wanting to get friendly.

------
bebeastie
This email is inaccurate on one item: the Google contact actually gets the add
contact request when the AIM user _adds_ the Google contact ( _not_ when the
AIM user sends the first message like the email states)

------
emilhajric
Nice to see AOL and Google collaborating on something sweet. I've been using
the AIM feature on Gtalk and always wondered ... Why did Google _just_ stop at
AOL? MSN, Skype, etc (all of which who are huge).

Maybe just a thing of keeping it simple? But again, it rises the question WHY
AOL ?

~~~
jonknee
Who's to say it was Google who stopped? Skype actively prevents anyone else
from making a client and I can easily see MS not wanting to play along with
Google.

~~~
guruz
How do the mobile/web/desktop clients work that do support Skype? I know for
the desktop there is an API which needs to the official client running on the
same computer.

------
kpreid
For us MobileMe/.Mac users, the usernames are in the format
user(mac.com)@aol.com, and presumably user(me.com)@aol.com. Unfortunately, not
@mac.com/@me.com.

------
guylhem
I still hope and wish someone working at AIM or AOL would let me know the
email address associated with my AIM account for which I have forgotten the
password some years ago. I've had too many accounts with too many ISP. The
forgotten password procedure only works if you remember which email address is
tied to the account, not if you have forgotten it too.

But now since anyone can connect to my gmail jabber address, I guess I'll keep
doing without AIM and drop my stupid hope of getting in touch with a human
being at AIM :-)

------
wccrawford
Has anyone gotten this to work? I managed to send a message from GTalk to AIM,
but it (and the one after) never got there.

~~~
ronaldj
Works for me.

------
jason_madigan
No support for Google Apps domains yet, but give it time I guess.

------
kash
i wonder if this will work with mobile numbers also. on AIM you can msg
+1AreacodeNumber so i wonder if +1AreacodeNumber@aol.com would work also!

------
n_are_q
What about interoperability with aim chat rooms?

~~~
jerf
That is significantly harder. Consider a graph (as in, graph data structure)
of IM users. Communicating between an AIM and an XMPP user is a single line,
and even though the two nodes are on different services it's not that hard to
make work. Almost by definition, both services have very similar semantics for
what an IM is, and stuff like presence converged a while ago enough for
interop.

Now, consider a conference. Let's say AIM_A and AIM_B wish to conference with
XMPP_X and XMPP_Y. Now there's _six_ entities; the four users I just
mentioned, and the conference rooms that are supposed to be reflections of
each other. Conference rooms actually have complicated protocols for creating
and managing them, fundamentally. Hooking them up to each other is very non-
trivial. What does it even _mean_ at the protocol level for XMPP_X to try to
kick AIM_A out of the conference? You need a lot of infrastructure to make
this work, almost none of which exists because it requires both conferences to
cooperate, or a lot of implementation by one side or the other to be able to
directly connect to an entirely foreign network on a foreign protocol. None of
which the proprietary networks are likely to do.

Without cooperation on both sides this is basically impossible.

~~~
n_are_q
Right, that makes sense, thank you for the explanation. I guess
interopertability between the two services implied to me they could speak
eachothers' protocols in entirety (at least ideally), so i pictured gtalk
talking to the aim chat room via its protocol. Oh well.

BTW this has implications for google apps users since there are no usable
persistent chat rooms in gtalk. Well i guess any users, but for businesses
chat rooms are more useful than for casual users I think.

------
clistctrl
I wonder how effective google is filtering spam IM requests?

