> Peter Saint-Andre desiderò: > >>> Oh. Do you have any documentation or description of how the documents >>> are kept identical in 1-to-1 sessions without the server as an >>> arbitrator? >> >> Yes, that would be helpful. As far as I can see, we would like the >> standardized protocol to support 1-to-1 mode without any intermediary. >> For example, this would be useful when running a whiteboarding session >> over a link-local connection (XEP-0174), or in situations where a MUC >> service or dedicated whiteboarding component is not available or not >> trusted to relay the relevant stanzas. > > I tend to think that in the link-local case the most interesting case is > the multiple user one (imagine doing that at a conference or in a office).
I think the OLPC folks have done some work on multi-user communications over link-local messaging. See also: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/private-muc.html > Maybe it could even be done electing a peer as arbitrator, but if it is > really distributed it would be a lot better (no election, no arbitrator > going away). > > I know that the Abiword people have something similar in AbiCollab > running over DBus tunnelled in XMMP, Cool, I didn't know about that. > so it may be useful to look at > their conflict resolution algorithm and their way to send changes. It seems to be described here: uwog.net/~uwog/abiword/abicollab.pdf /psa
