

Introducing the XMPP application server: Scalable, Distributed Twitter-esque App - iamelgringo
http://www.process-one.net/en/blogs/article/introducing_the_xmpp_application_server/

======
wallflower
For some reason, this reminds me of way-back when Pointcast was all the rage.
Pointcast had a lot of potential (but the API was flawed). Twitter has
demonstrated its potential. XMPP servers might not only make a better Twitter
but help bring it to the mainstream (twitter - "Mom, pick me up at school")

~~~
mickael
I think so. For this kind of application, you probably want it tight directly
to your list of contacts. Maybe this is the killer application for XMPP based
instant messaging ?

~~~
wallflower
OK, I've read Twitter has heart-stopping SMS usage bills (they use 3rd party
gateways). XMPP client for OpenSocial/Android/iPhone anyone? We need to break
the strangehold of SMS/Phone company gateways.

~~~
mickael
I would like to write an XMPP client at least for the iPhone, but we are
waiting for the native SDK from Apple. For Android, we are waiting for the
first devices. But sure it will come.

------
mickael
Note that this type of archictecture could also apply very well to reddit like
systems ;)

~~~
nmeyer
It can also be applied to p2p music sharing =) <http://www.reble.fm>

~~~
mickael
Ah yes, I forgot about this use case :)

------
axod
XML..... why???????????????????????????????????????????????

~~~
mickael
This is how the XMPP protocol as been designed. It is very powerful and most
of all extensible, most likely thanks to the use of XML. If something is not
in the protocol, you can add it for your own need.

~~~
bartman
The problem with XMPPs pubsub is that they don't have a clever multicast
strategy. All they it does unicast, twitter something to your 200 friends @
example.com? 200 unicast messages to example.com. (See
<http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0060.html> 1.2.)

~~~
mickael
That's not true. We have implemented multicast during the Google summer of
Code (See for example of the related patch: <https://support.process-
one.net/browse/EJAB-329>). It being test and optimised but works today if you
apply the patch. It will be in ejabberd 2.1.

It is implemented in the server for multiple things, including pubsub and
multi-user chat.

~~~
bartman
That's an improvement, however, after looking at it I must say that that's not
multicast. This is multiple recipients for a message.

You shouldn't need to address the recipients, presence already involves people
subscribing to your "presence channel". Thus your homeserver should know how
to distribute the efficiently - for example by multicast. XEP-0033 just adds
redundancy.

~~~
foonamefoo
Multicast only works on either something as esoteric as the MBONE or on a
local LAN/WAN. It isn't out there on the general internet, it requires too
much state in the routers, so it never took off.

~~~
mickael
The original comment was not on transport level multicast, but on application
level multicast. This is the one implement in ejabberd patches and thus works
over Internet, not only LAN/WAN.

