Very cool! I might switch from OpenFire to ejabbered just to use this if it continues to mature.
We will keep working on this as we will obviously use it ourselves :)
XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
11–20 of 31 posts
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#12Very cool! I might switch from OpenFire to ejabbered just to use this if it continues to mature.
I'd argue that ejabberd is faaar more mature than OpenFire. Their web gui is a little less polished but last I checked OpenFire's clustering mechanism is "buy very expensive oracle database". Still for small (under 100 users) installations without uptime guarantees OpenFire is easier to set up.
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#13Very cool! Unfortunately, most browsers are disabling websockets due to security issues in the websocket protocol itself.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/WebSockets
Can't wait until they fix this!
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#14As a big fan of and small contributor to ejabberd (I run im.wordpress.com), one who has used Jack's excellent strophe.js, and one who is anxious to see websockets in more use cases, I was pleased to read this news. However, I still consider XMPP as the protocol of last resort when designing apps for the browser that don't map perfectly onto XMPP. I would sooner write a new protocol than set up a new ejabberd cluster.…
Don't confuse the protocol and the server! It may be tricky to setup and ejabberd cluster, but you can't blame XMPP for that! Also, I wish people were more adventurous with XMPP in general and stop thinking that it's just a chat protocol.
We're actually thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server asynchronous messaging / pubsub protocol to help us with distributed processing and long running transactions. But I am already stretching my knowledge in this area and would love to chat with others who are thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server protocol. Julien - can I pick your brain?
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#15As a big fan of and small contributor to ejabberd (I run im.wordpress.com), one who has used Jack's excellent strophe.js, and one who is anxious to see websockets in more use cases, I was pleased to read this news. However, I still consider XMPP as the protocol of last resort when designing apps for the browser that don't map perfectly onto XMPP. I would sooner write a new protocol than set up a new ejabberd cluster.…
I've been using ejabberd a lot lately and it's a really nice piece of software, and works very well.
My biggest problem with XMPP as a whole is... well, it's XML. Not only is it heavier than it should be across the wire, it feels to me that the XML way of thinking leads to unnecessary verbosity when designing protocol messages. And there seems to be no proper consensus on how to use it among the different XMPP RFCs -- do we re-use a node name or come up with something different? Or just make it an attribute? Do we namespace it?
XMPP works great for what it was designed for though. There are many robust client and server implementations, being able to federate is awesome, and it's pretty easy to extend. But if I were to re-invent it, I would use a binary transport format.
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't confuse the protocol and the server! It may be tricky to setup and ejabberd cluster, but you can't blame XMPP for that! Also, I wish people were more adventurous with XMPP in general and stop thinking that it's just a chat protocol.
We're actually thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server asynchronous messaging / pubsub protocol to help us with distributed processing and long running transactions. But I am already stretching my knowledge in this area and would love to chat with others who are thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server protocol. Julien - can I pick your brain?
Ick. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
For server-to-server passing, prefer (in order):
1. redis pubsub
2. zeromq (if you know what you're doing)
3. amqp (if you think you need it)
4. populate events to a DB transactionally then consume later
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#17As a big fan of and small contributor to ejabberd (I run im.wordpress.com), one who has used Jack's excellent strophe.js, and one who is anxious to see websockets in more use cases, I was pleased to read this news. However, I still consider XMPP as the protocol of last resort when designing apps for the browser that don't map perfectly onto XMPP. I would sooner write a new protocol than set up a new ejabberd cluster.…
If you don't want the pain of setting up ejabberd, Prodosy has http://code.google.com/p/prosody-modules/wiki/mod_websocket module already... And is much nicer to setup.
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#18As a big fan of and small contributor to ejabberd (I run im.wordpress.com), one who has used Jack's excellent strophe.js, and one who is anxious to see websockets in more use cases, I was pleased to read this news. However, I still consider XMPP as the protocol of last resort when designing apps for the browser that don't map perfectly onto XMPP. I would sooner write a new protocol than set up a new ejabberd cluster.…
If you don't want the pain of setting up ejabberd, Prodosy has http://code.google.com/p/prosody-modules/wiki/mod_websocket module already... And is much nicer to setup.
Unfortunately this is not yet a usable solution. I'd love to see this implementation ported to Prosody though.
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#19As a big fan of and small contributor to ejabberd (I run im.wordpress.com), one who has used Jack's excellent strophe.js, and one who is anxious to see websockets in more use cases, I was pleased to read this news. However, I still consider XMPP as the protocol of last resort when designing apps for the browser that don't map perfectly onto XMPP. I would sooner write a new protocol than set up a new ejabberd cluster.…
Don't confuse the protocol and the server! It may be tricky to setup and ejabberd cluster, but you can't blame XMPP for that! Also, I wish people were more adventurous with XMPP in general and stop thinking that it's just a chat protocol.
Do you have any resources as to what XMPP actually is? I've only seen it mentioned in the chat protocol context.
Re: XMPP over websockets [HTML5]
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't confuse the protocol and the server! It may be tricky to setup and ejabberd cluster, but you can't blame XMPP for that! Also, I wish people were more adventurous with XMPP in general and stop thinking that it's just a chat protocol.
We're actually thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server asynchronous messaging / pubsub protocol to help us with distributed processing and long running transactions. But I am already stretching my knowledge in this area and would love to chat with others who are thinking of using XMPP as a server-to-server protocol. Julien - can I pick your brain?
Twitter had an XMPP feed at one point, but shut it down due to scaling issues and later brought up their current firehose/sitestreams service. Does anyone know if they ever talked about why XMPP didn't scale for them?
Site streams requires making one connection per 100 users; perhaps they were having trouble sharding with XMPP?