XSF Discussion - 2020-04-12

Hello!

Anyone here ?

Why response in XML ?

Why not JSON ?

Is XML faster than JSON !

xcoder: they're about equal!

xcoder: read https://xmpp.org/about/myths.html

Not equal !

JSON is easy to read , delivered fast than xml.

those are both subjective, arbitrary metrics

> JSON is easy to read Modern hypster webdev in a nutshell...

j.r: quite :p

Which one you would use in a project ?

> hypster Haha, amazing word

😛

This is not my question btw.

I asked why xmpp server using xml in response ?

Because that's how XMPP is specified?

I trace the the response using console.

If you have a bit more complex (nested) stuff JSON becomes really bad to read in my eyes... but yeah it's subjective

xcoder: well XMPP is much older than modern JSON-using applications

s/applications/protocols/

it's also naturally extensible (via namespaces), which has allowed the protocol to adapt

I read an article about xmpp, "Whatsapp using ir".

Is that right ?

(if you think JSON is also extensible, look at the tire fire that is JSON-LD)

WhatsApp is based on XMPP with a custom compression scheme.

Zoom is also based on XMPP. And Google Talk, and LoL, and lots of things.

(and Jitsi Meet)

Also i see a request repeated after 10 s to get the updates, what makes it different form normal setInterval !

what?

Are you looking at the BOSH requests?

Yes :V

It's using long-polling

Zash: (does BOSH use lo---

snap

I know.

Any communication application using long polling to get the updates the difference is the method.

What i noticed , is there no lag.

Normal SetInterval makes lag after some minutes of initialization.

Because the long-polling. The request isn't answererd until there's something new.

(or a timeout, in which case it does another request)

xcoder, pulling at predefined intervals wouldn't allow to get payloads faster or slower as necessary ✏

It could also use websockets. Or plain TCP.

Which is more preferable [sockets - setinterval]

setInterval has nothing to do with protocol, that's a JS function

I'm a web developer.

Surely you could use that to implement some really bad long-polling

There was "normal" polling back one billion years ago, but I don't think anyting uses that anymore.

Sockets can consume more memory ?

I never tried sockets so i can't judge it.

I'm asking if anyone has the experience.

BOSH consumes more bandwidth, since you can't idle for very long before doing another connection, also more overhead with HTTP headercs and stuff.

But BOSH is also more tolerant of network issues, IP address changes, or navigation to different web page.

Desktop applications would use normal TCP sockets. Probably similar to websockets in overhead and stuff.

So what's the recommended resources if i want to build large chat system [text - audio - video]

Hire a large team of experts.

"Resources" not experts.

Human Resources :P

I already developed many chat system, but not high traffic.

Don't reinvent the wheel, use one of the many available implementations.

That saves you a lot of resources

I'm asking what is the "infrastructure" that whatsapp,imo,telegram are using.

https://xmpp.org/uses/instant-messaging.html and https://xmpp.org/uses/webrtc.html of any use?

And don't "forget" to contribute back ✏

IIRC whatsapp was using a heavily customised ejabberd in the beginning, no idea what they're doing now

xcoder: to get started, install one of the freely available xmpp servers, and a client of choice. If you're into web, start with a web client like Converse.

If you are things in action, you can learn how to adapt things to your needs.

That gives you a pragmatic approach, that you can actually see do something.

Zash thanks for the link.

Guus, Yes i will use one of these servers just a start.

xcoder: if you think about implementing some feature, take a look at the wide range of existing protocol extensions before doing your own thing 😃

Are you ios developer ?

xcoder: luckily not :P

😒