[jdev] [ANN] Google Talk engineering manager live chat

[Hal Rottenberg]

On 9/23/05, Richard Dobson <richard at dobson-i.net> wrote:
> > I think this is simply something terribly broken about most XMPP
> > implementations.
>
> Im not convinced of this, personally I think the DNS situation is exactly as
> it should be, lets use some examples of other situations.
>
> SMTP
> Lets say a users email address is user at email.isp.com and no MX records or

Richard, I have to say I agree with Jive on this one.  Not because I
disagree with your SMTP and HTTP examples, they are flawless.  The
issue I have encountered myself is simply that it didn't make sense to
me to have a different domain name for every service on a server.  I
was assuming all along that this was a design decision (or flaw) of
jabberd1 to be honest, not a requirement of XMPP.  After all, you can
certainly run an SMTP and HTTP server and a million others all on the
same server using the same domain name.  Jabber is the only software
that I have heard of that breaks pieces out this way.

When I was first messing with jabber several years ago, it was to
setup a workgroup server in my large enterprise.  It took me some time
to realize that those extra subdomains were really required, not
suggested.  IIRC I actually faked them with local host file entries
during my experimentation.  It was easier to do that than wade the
bottomless pit that is IT support.

So what I'm saying is all of your problems raised above would not be
problems if everything could be done on one domain name.  Wow, Jive is
giving me that.  Sounds like a feature to me.  Sounds like a
workaround and a dirty one at that to developers, but I would suggest
that "everyone else" sees it differently.

--
Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal at jabber.rocks.cc
http://halr9000.com