On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 06:41:18PM +0200, Eugene Leitl wrote:
Gale http://www.gale.org/ seems a well thought out infrastructure. Is the
consensus "this is it", or have I missed any alternatives?
Have you seen http://www.silcnet.org/?
--
Pawe Krawczyk *** home: http://ceti.pl/~kravietz/
At 06:41 PM 08/30/2001 +0200, Eugene Leitl wrote:
Gale http://www.gale.org/ seems a well thought out infrastructure. Is the
consensus this is it, or have I missed any alternatives?
Jabber seems to be emerging as the main cross-ISP instant messaging platform.
I'm not sure how much security it
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Rich Salz wrote:
Gale seems to have a better security story, but Jabber certainly has the
momentum and large force behind it.
How does SILC http://www.silcnet.org/ fit the bill?
-- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/;leitl/a
gale has scaling problems to large numbers of users, in particular
for group messaging.
-derek
Eugene Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gale http://www.gale.org/ seems a well thought out infrastructure. Is the
consensus this is it, or have I missed any alternatives?
TIA,
-- Eugen* Leitl
gale has scaling problems to large numbers of users, in particular
for group messaging.
What doesn't? :)
Gale seems to have a better security story, but Jabber certainly has the
momentum and large force behind it.
ironyPlus, it's XML so you *know* it's good./irony
/r$
--
Zolera
Gale http://www.gale.org/ seems a well thought out infrastructure. Is the
consensus this is it, or have I missed any alternatives?
TIA,
-- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/;leitl/a
__
ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53''
