Hello,
Just a small heads up.
At the 3GSM Congress in Barcelona this week we are demoing our XMPP-IMPS
interworking solution.
IMPS (formerly known as Wireless Village) is an instant messaging protocol
for wireless devices specified by the Open Mobile Alliance
Sander Devrieze a écrit :
Op woensdag 15 februari 2006 18:55, schreef Hal Rottenberg:
Didn't test it much yet, but it looks very cool! So I take it the
requirements on the server are ej-cvs?
For the moment, you need next patch as it is not yet in the Subversion
repository:
Hello
Stefan!
I have briefly
tested the application on jabber.no, see it her: http://www.jabber.no/en/chatroom(or
rather here: http://www.jabber.no/muckl/)
The only problem I
can see is that it does not work for me in IE, but it does on your test site for
some reason.
The error is on
I got it to work
now, not sure what the problem was but it is working now! :) I just deleted the
install and reconfigured it again .. and now it works :)
Disregard:
Hello
Stefan!
I have briefly
tested the application on jabber.no, see it her: http://www.jabber.no/en/chatroom(or
Right. And if that is too expensive, you can use software load
balancing (such as Windows NLB /WLBS). I think using XMPP for this
would be unwise.
On 2/13/06, Paul Clegg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From your description, it seems that a hardware load balancer in front of
your web service farm
We actually have at least one customer that uses XMPP and presence for
load balanced and redundant services, but they built their applications
from the ground up with this in mind.
However, as Hal said, use a load balancer made for HTTP. :) NLB in
Windows does a great job. I'm sure there are
Ben Turner schrieb:
Hello,
Just a small heads up.
At the 3GSM Congress in Barcelona this week we are demoing our XMPP-IMPS
interworking solution.
IMPS (formerly known as Wireless Village) is an instant messaging protocol
for wireless devices specified by the Open Mobile Alliance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
FYI, I've started to define a Jabber-ID email header so that people
can automatically detect JIDs associated with senders (could be cool for
presence icons in email clients, message verification a la JEP-0070,
etc.). More here:
aliban wrote:
Why do they use their own IMPS thing? why don't they use XMPP directly?
Wild guess: Because they want to charge you $0.10 per message? :)
Although they could make for that by the verbosity of a default XMPP
connection. Just transferring a decently sized roster costs more than 10
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 07:51:33PM +0100, aliban wrote:
Well, afaik Mobile providers want to have this IMPS to replace SMS in
future.
Why do they use their own IMPS thing? why don't they use XMPP directly?
Since operators want to charge you for every IM you send :-) In the US, a lot of
10 matches
Mail list logo
