Re: [DotGNU]Re: A Proposal for a Solution (Jabber)

[Barry Fitzgerald]

Hmmm... Very interesting...

OK, you've convinced me that Jabber might be - at least partially - what
we're looking for.  But, before wasting your time doing the research,
I'd like to personally take a harder look at some of the Jabber
resources you posted earlier on the list. :)

Or, if you have any other resources that you'd like to point me to, I'd
appreciate it. :)

Thanks again. :)

        -Barry

Adam Theo wrote:
> 
> barry wrote:
> > Good ideas here, please see the RLS spec at
> > http://www.dotgnu.org/spec/rls.htm ... it should be relatively
> > self-explanatory.  I will be releasing a companion to this spec that
> > explains the token scheme tomorrow.  It needs a little cleaning up
> > before I release it.  Have fun. :)
> 
> ah! nice!
> 
> i see you are well on your way by taking the first step to
> conceptualization: addressing and identifiers.
> 
> i basically like the plan you have there, and would like to try and
> convince you to use Jabber for addressing and identifiers. it will
> require a bit of 're-syboling' from the RLS there, but Jabber can do
> everything you set out in it and a bit more, i believe.
> 
> now, everything i say below only goes off of memeory. i do not know any
> of this for sure, but if you are serious in investigating jabber, and
> are maybe willing to try a slightly different location scheme, i'll do
> the hard time and research exactly how jabber does resource naming and
> such, and report back to you.
> 
> jabber, in it's full entirity, follows this format in it's RLS: i use
> the same notation as you do, by the way.
> 
> address@hidden<jabber.server>[/resource](?tokens)
> 
> now, taking it from left to right:
> 
> [username] is, i believe, optional. it is only optional however, if you
> want to reach the jabber server and not a jabber user. translating your
> proposed RLS over to jabber, i would suggest making use of the username
> field here by using it for the DotGNU service.
> 
> <jabber.server> is the DNS or IP of the DotGNU server. i would suggest a
> convention of using a subdomain of 'dotgnu' for the dotgnu server. that
> way the jabber server (acting as the gateway and locator router) will
> not get any [usernames] used by it confused with joe shmoe who jas a
> jabber account at the same server to talk with his girlfriend online.
> 
> [resource] is, in the jabber world, used to signify different
> 'instances' of a user's account. for example, the 'kitchen' resource
> could be for the network appliance sitting next to the microwave on the
> kitchen counter, or the 'alert' resource could potentially be used by
> others to give an emergency alarm to the user/resource, for whatever
> reason.
> 
> (tokens) are in parenthesis because they are not currently implimented
> in the jabber protocol. but i *just* read someone on the jabber
> developers list trying to get this proposed to the jabber foundation
> today, so he must be thinking along the same lines as you are. i do not
> know how tokens would be formatted in his scheme, but i'm sure he would
> appreciate some input from you guys if you were interested in supporting
> his idea.
> 
> note that in jabber, i think tokens would be (in most cases, anyway)
> best left for the message or information itself. in jabber, XML messages
> are sent to and from these address@hidden/resource locators. these XML
> messages are very flexible, and can take in namespaces from other xml
> specs. the jabber server even as it stands now, can take any message and
> route it to other servers or modules depending upon the namespace it
> reads.... so again, it will be very easy for you to use jabber. as of
> the v1.4 line it is very modular and will require very little if any
> changing to fit into DotGNU.