<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>RE: [JDEV] The Important Things</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>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?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>THANKS in advance!</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>dedalo</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-----Mensaje original-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>De: Ashvil [<A HREF="mailto:ashvil@i3connect.net">mailto:ashvil@i3connect.net</A>] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Enero de 2002 09:12 a.m.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Para: jdev@jabber.org</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Asunto: Re: [JDEV] The Important Things</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> Ashvil wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > With regards to scalabilty, I feel that we need to move to the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Apache</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>and</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > SendMail model. Millions of small servers in different domains, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > rather</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>then</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > AOL's centralized model. If some ISP still demands scalabilty, then </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > they</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>can</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > choose Jabber.com's JCS.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2><snip></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> So i don't understand why somebody is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> saying something like this on a mailing list</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> about opensource project.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>First of all, I don't work for Jabber.com or will gain if they do well.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>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.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>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.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>>it's ok we can stop developing the server.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>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.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Regards,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Ashvil</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>_______________________________________________</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>jdev mailing list</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>jdev@jabber.org</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2><A HREF="http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev" TARGET="_blank">http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev</A></FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>