It seem the concept of using XMPP to replace the web is taking off. We XMPP guys are promoting of since 7 years.
5 months, 1 week ago in Home, Paris, France.
12 comments so far
Tsk. Replacing the web has never been the goal, I would say.
Complementing it, though, you bet! HTTP is being bent in every
direction to make it do thing it wasn't designed for, and XMPP
seems to be a natural replacement in those areas. But HTTP still
has a strong set of use cases it excels in.
Yes, I volontary pushed the idea very far. Xmpp is not made to
deal with rendering for example. However, it has been designed from
the beginning as an interface to services. A way to mix humans and
applications in the same workflow.
You are always pushing an infinite stream, but clients don't
need to pull every item. Maybe the teaser in the notification is
enough for me not to pull the rest.
HTTP can be per item. You just fetch the items that you
want.
Bad architecture of current Blog systems, should not be blamed
on HTTP...
Well, for streaming, no, HTTP is not ideal, but unless we can
get multicast deployed, there's little alternative. Likewise, you
could easily build a better protocol than HTTP - HTTP sucks - but
the trouble is that you can't build one sufficiently better for
HTTP's core and close use-cases that people actually switch.
Ah, but infinite content != blog content. If you want streaming,
we have other protocols for that. Like RTP.
As for sharing a GiB file, sure you can use other protocols for
that, but I maintain that HTTP can handle that quite nicely. Unless
you mean other properties that come with the use of HTTP, like its
TCP binding and it not working nicely with firewalls etc. Then
yeah, other protocols might be better.
12 comments so far
Tsk. Replacing the web has never been the goal, I would say. Complementing it, though, you bet! HTTP is being bent in every direction to make it do thing it wasn't designed for, and XMPP seems to be a natural replacement in those areas. But HTTP still has a strong set of use cases it excels in.
5 months, 1 week ago by ralphm.
An intriguing topic, this.
5 months, 1 week ago by tommi.
Yes, I volontary pushed the idea very far. Xmpp is not made to deal with rendering for example. However, it has been designed from the beginning as an interface to services. A way to mix humans and applications in the same workflow.
5 months, 1 week ago by mickael.
I don't believe XMPP will ever replace HTTP for pull-style interactions. It just fails miserably with large content for example.
For push-style interactions, or presence-aware interactions, its unbeatable right now.
1 week, 5 days ago by melo.
@melo: Quite a backlog of Jaiku reading you have there.
1 week, 5 days ago by ralphm.
@melo: I agree for large content, but even for large blog content HTTP is not even ideal.
1 week, 5 days ago by mickael.
@mickael: huh what? How is HTTP not adequate for large blog content, exactly?
1 week, 5 days ago by ralphm.
@ralphm: just found this thread :)
@mickael: that ship has sailed in my opinion. With HTTP1.1, chunked encoding, and byte range support, HTTP is actually quite good.
But maybe you are complaining about RSS/Atom pooling. If yes, then sure, HTTP pooling sucks, because that's a fake push. But I would prefer to:
Done.
1 week, 5 days ago by melo.
yes, suppose you publish an infinite content (streaming), it is becoming akward. and to share a Gb content it will not be my protocol of choice
1 week, 5 days ago by mickael.
You are always pushing an infinite stream, but clients don't need to pull every item. Maybe the teaser in the notification is enough for me not to pull the rest.
HTTP can be per item. You just fetch the items that you want.
Bad architecture of current Blog systems, should not be blamed on HTTP...
1 week, 5 days ago by melo.
Well, for streaming, no, HTTP is not ideal, but unless we can get multicast deployed, there's little alternative. Likewise, you could easily build a better protocol than HTTP - HTTP sucks - but the trouble is that you can't build one sufficiently better for HTTP's core and close use-cases that people actually switch.
1 week, 5 days ago by dwd.
Ah, but infinite content != blog content. If you want streaming, we have other protocols for that. Like RTP.
As for sharing a GiB file, sure you can use other protocols for that, but I maintain that HTTP can handle that quite nicely. Unless you mean other properties that come with the use of HTTP, like its TCP binding and it not working nicely with firewalls etc. Then yeah, other protocols might be better.
1 week, 5 days ago by ralphm.