Hello Fabio, Fabio Forno wrote:
> Which is the exact thought I made while implementing a transport for > Facebook. However this is not bad approach necessarily, since for > scaling and better integration with existing systems we must stop > thinking of XMPP servers as standalone things (yep, they support > clustering, but I'm talking about functionality). Perhaps all > Facebook is needing now is just an S2S component able to map between > their http-based chat and other xmpp services... For this thing all > existing XMPP servers must be reworked a lot. Yes, it might be a good enough approach and pragmatic approach for them. I also think they are going to write only an s2s wrapper to give access to chat (or maybe a c2s one only on the reverse if they want to avoir federation). My point is that they did not choose to reimplement an XMPP server. They decided that they wanted to use a custom chat protocol which is not XMPP. -- Mickaël Rémond http://www.process-one.net/
