<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <TITLE>RE: [JDEV] The Important Things</TITLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV>Good question especially if you'd like to authenticate using LDAP?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- RM</DIV> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Rodrigo Roman [mailto:dedalo@ferengi.com.ar] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:22 PM To: 'jdev@jabber.org' Subject: RE: [JDEV] The Important Things </DIV> I'm new in the discussion but need to install a server in an ISP, about 3000 concurrent users, do I have to use JCS or open source jabber is OK for this? THANKS in advance! dedalo -----Mensaje original----- De: Ashvil [<A href="mailto:ashvil@i3connect.net">mailto:ashvil@i3connect.net</A>] Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Enero de 2002 09:12 a.m. Para: jdev@jabber.org Asunto: Re: [JDEV] The Important Things > Ashvil wrote: > > With regards to scalabilty, I feel that we need to move to the > > Apache and > > SendMail model. Millions of small servers in different domains, > > rather then > > AOL's centralized model. If some ISP still demands scalabilty, then > > they can > > choose Jabber.com's JCS. <snip> > So i don't understand why somebody is > saying something like this on a mailing list > about opensource project. First of all, I don't work for Jabber.com or will gain if they do well. I do care that Jabber does well. For me, Jabber is a community that includes the Jabber open source server, other proprietary servers like JCS, Jabcast, etc., open source clients WinJab, etc., proprietary clients like Jabber IM, Vista, etc., clients libraries, server modules, innovative stuff like Jogger, etc. and finally the end users who use Jabber. From the technical side we are bound by the Jabber specification. So Jabber to me is MORE then just an Open Source project. I think this is the view in the Jabber community also, but if I am wrong, please correct me. With regard to my comment on JCS, my position is connecting to a Jabber server (whether open source or not) is better then connecting to an AOL server. Using a client supporting the Jabber protocol (whether open source or not) is better then using the AIM client. Both the actions GROW the jabber community, so if I want to use the open source versions of either the client or server, I can MAKE that choice. With the CLOSED AOL AIM protocol, that choice is not possible. >it's ok we can stop developing the server. I never said in my email that we need to stop development of the server. I support your desire to for Jabber to be 'the best server'. All I said were two things with regards to the Jabber server, which I am expanding and repeating here 1. If the Jabber server is used in a distributed fashion like sendmail and Apache, then that reduces the scalability requirements. 2. For ISPs that demand more scalability, let them use JCS, etc. now instead of choosing some closed solution like Odigo or co-branding AOL, Yahoo, etc. That way, when the jabber server meets their requirements, they can adopt it easily. Regards, Ashvil _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list jdev@jabber.org <A href="http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev" target=_blank>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev</A> </BODY></HTML>