From 8cd8c208461c01af397075b0cd4a886045874776 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://phil.0x539.de/" Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:50:42 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- .../comment_2_43664b73c71c41d71bc95e665f128106._comment | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/design/assistant/blog/day_128__last_xmpp_day/comment_2_43664b73c71c41d71bc95e665f128106._comment diff --git a/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_128__last_xmpp_day/comment_2_43664b73c71c41d71bc95e665f128106._comment b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_128__last_xmpp_day/comment_2_43664b73c71c41d71bc95e665f128106._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..3a83186184 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_128__last_xmpp_day/comment_2_43664b73c71c41d71bc95e665f128106._comment @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="http://phil.0x539.de/" + nickname="Philipp Kern" + subject="comment 2" + date="2012-11-12T11:50:42Z" + content=""" +Developing something new based on IPv4 UDP broadcast seems to be insane. IPv6 link-local multicast should be available virtually anywhere. XMPP relies on TCP and a central server to guarantee that a single packet is not split up, which would need quite some protocol engineering to get right over lossy UDP (e.g. segmentation, flow control, congestion avoidance). But TCP as discovered using mDNS might work… Still needs some kind of authentication / encryption, though. +"""]]