Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Programming Jabber

Posted by timothy on Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:00 AM
from the some-people-jabber-naturally dept.
Reader cpfeifer contributes the review below of O'Reilly's Programming Jabber: if your job (or hobby) includes instant messaging in all its glory, Jabber is a free-beer, free-speech framework for setting up instant messaging systems not bound to a single server in the middle. As cpfeifer points out, instant messaging can mean a lot more than popping an on-screen note to your friend in Des Moines -- machines and programs can use a general purpose communication system like this, with no human middleman required.
Programming Jabber
author D.J. Adams
pages 4555
publisher O'Reilly
rating 9
reviewer http://cpfeifer.blogspot.com
ISBN 0596002025
summary A detailed guide for developers to understanding and extending the Jabber messaging framework. Examples in Perl, Python and Java.

The Scenario

Jabber was first conceived by Jeremie Miller (pic) in early 1998 in an effort to unify the disparate instant messaging networks. Instant Messaging networks rely on the network effect to gain and retain marketshare. The concept is the same when applied to any sort of participatory network whether it's a junk exchange, or content exchange, the value of the network increases with the square of the number of participants.

If this is true, then doesn't it follow that it is in the best interests of the IM networks to establish peering agreements with each other so that their users can directly contact users on other networks without having to install each client?

Hello, Jabber.

When I first picked up this book, I expected to understand the Jabber protocol in sufficient depth to implement my own IM client. Instead, the approach this book takes is that Jabber isn't just an XML-based protocol strictly for IM, rather it is a general purpose event notification protocol that has some very nice message routing and user management features built into it. While i was reading about the messages that Jabber has defined as part of the protocol, I could easily see other applications/devices generating Jabber messages to notify subscribers (either other systems, or people) of events.

Part 1 of the book focuses on getting you up to speed on the basics of Jabber technology: motivation, major features, XML protocol sample and compiling/configuring your own Jabber server. Chapter 2 presents the "10,000 foot view" of Jabber technology. In here you will find a sample client-query request/response flow with full HTTP headers, discussed step by step. The next two chapters are a very in-depth discussion of installing and configuring your own Jabber server. When you dive into a custom configuration of a fleet of Jabber servers (a "constellation" in Jabber terminology), it really starts to hit home that the real problem Jabber solves is far deeper than just IM.

From there, part 2 kicks off with a detailed discussion of the most basic building blocks of Jabber technology: resource identifiers, XML handling mechanism and the set of XML elements/attributes that make up the vocabulary of the Jabber protocol. Each element/attribute is presented with an annotated example and sample client/server interactions where appropriate. Examples can make or break a technical book, and these examples do a good job of illustrating how the element/attribute is used.

The following chapters take you through using standard Jabber features, user registration/authorization, messages, presence, groupchat, components and the event model to enable new applications. One very interesting application presented is enabling developers to receive CVS commit notifications via Jabber.

What's Bad?

I know the /. community is suspicious of glowing book reviews where everything is wonderful and nothing could be done to improve the book, so I'll nitpick. My major problem with this book is that the overwhelming majority of the sample applications are written in PERL/TK. This isn't a problem in and of itself, but I'm not a PERL/TK developer. If I build a Jabber solution, it will be in java, so PERL/TK samples don't do me a lot of good. I think equal time should be given to implementing Jabber using the two most-used languages, as defined by the number and activity of open source projects using Jabber technology.

What's Good?

This book covers everything relevant to Jabber technology, from lowest level inner workings and extensibility examples for developers to configuration and deployment for admins. Most of the book is spent looking directly at the Jabber XML protocol, instead of a specific API implementation. This way, the book covers the technology and doesn't get lost in how one particular API models the protocol.

So What's In It For Me?

If you want to implement an inside-the-firewall IM solution for your company/group/tribe or investigate integrating event notification into an application, this is a great starting point. If you're just curious about Jabber and want to know how it works, then this will give you enough information to get you hooked.

Table of Contents

PART 1: Getting Started with Jabber

  • Chapter 1. Introducing Jabber
  • Chapter 2. Inside Jabber
  • Chapter 3. Installing the Jabber Server
  • Chapter 4. Server Architecture and Configuration

PART 2: Putting Jabber's Concepts to Work

  • Chapter 5. Jabber Technology Basics
  • Chapter 6. Jabber Namespaces
  • Chapter 7. User Registration and Authorization
  • Chapter 8. Using Messages and Presence
  • Chapter 9. Groupchat, Components, and Event Models
  • Chapter 10. Pointers for Further Development

Appendix A. The Jabber.xml Contents

Appendix B. The IQRPC Classes for JabberRPCResponder

Index


O'Reilly has posted other reviews of the book on their site. You can purchase Programming Jabber from bn.com. Want to see your own review here? Just read the book review guidelines, then use Slashdot's handy submission form.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Trend in modern computing (Score:2, Informative)

    by alapalaya (561911) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:10AM (#3323477)
    machines and programs can use a general purpose communication system like this, with no human middleman required.

    This is on of the hottest topic for the near-future computing world.
    Anyway the SOAP (+WSDL+UDDI, ie: the Web Services) initiative seems much closer to be the real mover in this environment.
    Interesting (but not suprisingly), XML is the basic enabling technology for all these efforts.
  • Jabber (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sabby (1759) <chapmandNO@SPAMpilot.msu.edu> on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:10AM (#3323479) Homepage
    I got really excited about Jabber for the longest time. I'm sort of disappointed in it now, since it seems like they're still having problems connecting to AIM and ICQ. The AIM connection is the most vital for me, since our department uses AIM to send short quick messages to each other. Most of the people here are using AIM's own client, but I started to use Jabber so that I could talk to my friends on ICQ. (And promptly signed up for MSN and Yahoo, so I could catch everyone from everywhere.) Now I use Trillian [trillian.cc], which only disappoints me by neither providing source code (which I only want for the principle of it) nor supporting Jabber itself (which does kind of bug me).
    • jabber: much more than just IM by Roadmaster (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:18AM
    • Re:Jabber by garcia (Score:3) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:22AM
    • Re:Jabber (Score:4, Informative)

      by JabberWokky (19442) <slashdot.com@timewarp.org> on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:57AM (#3323817) Homepage Journal
      FWIW, when I upgraded to KDE 3, I took a look around and decided to play with new software. I had had much the same experience with Jabber, where it just didn't really work well with other IM systems. For the past three days or so, I've been using Psi [affinix.com], which seems to work quite nicely with Yahoo Messenger and AIM (the latter of which I use quite heavily in both work and socially). It's Qt based, and so it runs on Windows, Linux, OSX and embedded systems, and since it's under the GPL, you can use the Qt free edition. I think there were binaries there for all the platforms.

      YMMV, but it's working for me, plus the cross platform nature means that I'll start recommending it to people who have been using Trillian in the past. It's at the "almost there, but not quite finished" level, with two major bits missing - a total lack of documentation (which can get gotten around), and lack of support for group chat - which means the IRC service won't connect (not to mention AIM group chats). I just discovered it, so I can't say how fast work progresses on the project, but it's very much usable for my needs right now. Sounds like it might work for you, too.

      My Jabber ID is JabberWokky@charente.de, and that server supports AIM, ICQ, MSN, YIM, Jabber and IRC.

      --
      Evan

      [ Parent ]
    • Not Jabber's fault. by Big Sean O (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:59AM
    • Re:Jabber by tzanger (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:14PM
    • Re:Jabber by Tadhg (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:58PM
      • Re:Jabber by Sabby (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @03:32PM
    • Re:Jabber by infiniti99 (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @03:08PM
      • Re:Jabber by Sabby (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @03:36PM
        • Re:Jabber by infiniti99 (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @05:22PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Jabber and Sendmail (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:11AM (#3323487)
    While on the topic of Jabber. Why not have the sendmail folks and the jabber folks get togethor and unite their work into a single project. Complete with admin tools so that once someone has a sendmail account on a Unix, they by default have a jabber IM account. It would go a long ways towards taking down AIM, MSN, and ICQ.
  • Review (Score:1)

    by Monkey-Man (145523) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:11AM (#3323489) Homepage
    I think this review [oreilly.com] says it all: "Quite simply, Programming Jabber rocks! When reviewing the book, I often found myself reading along, having a good time and getting excited about Jabber instead of looking to see if something was wrong or missing." --Jeremie Miller, Founder and Lead Developer of Jabber
  • Jabber + SSL (Score:4, Interesting)

    by cygnusx (193092) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:11AM (#3323491) Homepage
    I've set up a Jabber box (an early 1.x release) and played about with it, and it was a *very* good experience. Everything worked as advertised. On the other hand, setting up Jabber with SSL was a confusing process without too much documentation and I eventually gave up. Since SSL is a must for `serious' Jabber use, has there been some progress made on making secure Jabber installations easy to achieve?
  • Prebuilt clinets? (Score:1)

    by burts_here (529713) <burts_here.fuckmicrosoft@com> on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:11AM (#3323493) Homepage
    Are their any pre-built clinet all ready out thier? Please don't tell me to wirte my own, cos i have an amazing ability to:
    1- fail to get the fundimental concepts (of anything)
    2- write hooj crappy code that just loops and burns
    3- I have been diagnosed as having an attention span of a small nat.
    oh and i would use google to look for some but my companys web access is going a bit screwy at the moment and google has dissapered...
  • by comp.sci (557773) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:11AM (#3323494)
    I experienced some problems when trying to go to the sample chapter 5 of the book. the server gave me a 404 and I did a quick search for the page and had no problems opening it with another link, but at exactly the same address. Maybe the admins check my webbrowsers vars and check if I came from slashdot. For me it works to just copy the adress into another browser window: [www.oreilly.com/catalog/jabber/chapter/ch05.html] I hope I could help
  • My big problem with Jabber... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mo (2873) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:12AM (#3323498)
    I read this book looking to use jabber for automated XML messaging and I'll have to say, it has a lot of nifty features that I'd love to use. Unfortunately, it's never getting deployed in my network. Why?
    You can't cluster jabber servers. If the main jabber server goes down, you're hosed. In any application that's worth the effort to deploy, having such a single point of failure is a big problem. Additionally, I was kinda annoyed at how jabber leans so much towards instant messaging. I know, I know, that's what it was built for, but this book is trying to pass it off as an "XML messaging" tool, but it's properties often sway back to IM.

    In conclusion, if you wanna fool around with a nifty IM robot that doesn't need to be relied on, jabber is a nifty tool. If you wanna do real XML messaging, try something like xmlblaster.
    • Re:My big problem with Jabber... by gUmbi (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:33AM
    • Re:My big problem with Jabber... by zsa (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:38AM
    • wrong (Score:5, Informative)

      by Milkman Ken (26074) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:42PM (#3324107) Homepage
      You can very easily cluster jabber servers. In fact, I have five running:

      one for the main server

      one specifically for AIM

      one for ICQ

      one for MSN

      one for yahoo! IM

      the four IM trasport servers have their own jabberd process. If a transport server dies (as they occasionally do), you can bring that server back up without affecting any other servers.

      But you don't have to break up the servers this way. You could run multiple jabber servers, and place bandwidth restrictions on them so that when a jabber server got "full", it would stop receiving connections, so the jabber server above it in the chain would then forward it on to the next jabber server in the chain, or back up if it's out of children servers.

      it's a relatively simple matter to setup an init.d script to monitor the health of all the processes, and restart them when and if they fail. I've been running a jabber server on one of our linux boxes for weeks now, and I haven't had to touch it once. I highly recommend jabber for intranets.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:wrong by mo (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @01:52PM
        • Re:wrong by Milkman Ken (Score:3) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:26PM
          • Re:wrong by hpavc (Score:1) Friday April 12 2002, @01:42AM
    • Re:My big problem with Jabber... (Score:4, Informative)

      by jeremie (257) on Thursday April 11 2002, @01:02PM (#3324221) Homepage
      What your talking about here is a particular implementation of a Jabber server, jabberd [jabberstudio.org], not Jabber in general (people often confuse this point). You can do some minimal clustering with the jabberd-1.4 series, but probably not the kind of reliability that your looking for or that jabber.com [jabber.com] has built into their server.

      Jabber is an open system/protocol, anyone can build new servers/clients/etc with whatever features and extensions they want, including building it on/with xmlblaster. Jabberd is also an open source project that your welcome to help with (farming/clustering is a frequent need and I suspect that it will be a large part of the jabberd-1.5 development series).
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:My big problem with Jabber...:LINUX HA by bernz (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @04:54PM
  • Hey, remember SMTP? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hqm (49964) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:13AM (#3323509)
    One thing that confuses me about Jabber is that
    people seem to forget that good old SMTP solves many of the same problems, and in fact solves them better.

    For example, many years of work have gone into making sure that email never gets lost. SMTP mailers just don't lose email anymore. Jabber messages, on the other hand, are not really reliable. If the user to whom you are targeting a message is not online, the server may queue the messages, but the policy is not clear as to how long they will be stored, or if the server is rquired to store them at all.

    This makes me worry about the idea of using Jabber to build infrastructure where you
    rely on messages to always be delivered.

    It seems to me that many of the issues that Jabber
    solves have been solved using existing
    technology such as SMTP, and mailer and mailing list services built on top of it, like qmail, mailman, etc.
  • Jabber (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sabby (1759) <chapmandNO@SPAMpilot.msu.edu> on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:13AM (#3323514) Homepage

    I've played around with the jabber module in Perl, which was pretty easy to use.

    Jabber started to disappoint when they stopped supporting AIM/ICQ. I don't know if it's permanent, I don't actually know if it's still not supported. But, since AIM is what I have to use for work (otherwise, I would still just be using ICQ to talk to my friends), I needed something that could stay connected.

    I use Trillian [trillian.cc] now. It still does ICQ/AIM as well as IRC/MSN/Y!, which is why I need something like this, but it doesn't provide source code (which I only really want for the principle of it) and it doesn't support Jabber's protocol. (They're talking about releasing an API for writing plugins. At least it's free (as in beer). (I've got a few of my coworkers switched from AIM to Trillian...) Hopefully Jabber will fix up the connectivity issues (or have ALREADY fixed them up.) gosh, I should download WinJab again and check.

    • Re:Jabber by SlightlyMadman (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:22AM
      • Re:Jabber by Temas (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @12:01PM
        • Re:Jabber by Sabby (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @03:39PM
  • by zentigger (203922) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:15AM (#3323526) Homepage
    machines and programs can use a general purpose communication system like this, with no human middleman required.


    ...since this has been the general philosophy of Outlook for years now. This of course has also been the largest single security hole for years now too!

    I think I still like being the human middleman, thank you very much!

  • Value = N-Squared (Score:1)

    by FFtrDale (521701) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:17AM (#3323539)
    ...the value of the network increases with the square of the number of participants.

    Where does this intuitively-obvious statement come from? How do we know that it's squared? I believe that it's true in general: that value increases geometrically as N increases. Who has run the numbers on this phenomenon, and where can we go to find descriptions of epiphenomena related to it?

    If this is true, then doesn't it follow that it is in the best interests of the IM networks to establish peering agreements with each other so that their users can directly contact users on other networks without having to install each client?

    It seems that when people are investing resources (money, effort and time), it's seeing the actual numbers that will convince them. Anybody got references at hand?

  • I use it every day (Score:2)

    by Raleel (30913) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:18AM (#3323548)
    I have a lot fo friends on different IM systems. Mostly it's AIM, but some on ICQ, Yahoo, and MSN. I use gabber as my primary linux IM client, and myJabber for windows.

    Probably the best thing about gabber and myJabber is that they offer encryption. Both can connect to servers using SSL encryption, and gabber has the added bonus of being able to use GPG keys for one to one chats to particular users. This gives me a warm squishy feeling as I communicate over networks that I _know_ are being monitored. The SSL is very nice, because at least I know my communication between the server and myself is at least not totally trivial to break (yes, I know about ettercap). This appears to even affect my aim traffic, as the AIM transport on the server does the actual relaying of messages.

    Jabber has a billion other things in it. You should really give it a shot.

  • Could Jabber replace IBM's MQ-Series? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by s390 (33540) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:21AM (#3323571) Homepage
    I'm serious. IBM spent a ton of money building MQ-Series, which is a hideously complex messaging protocol for inter-and-intra systems communications in and between mainframe subsystems/LPARs and Unix systems (AIX mostly, since this is IBM, after all).

    MQ-Series really is complicated, maybe over-complicated, to the point that IBM and customers even have "MQ-Series Specialists" on staff.

    I'm not flaming IBM here (h*ll, I used to work for them, and they're a great company to work with), but they do have an unfortunate tendency to build overly complex systems where simpler ones might be a lot easier to use.

  • Pretty good stuff. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by The Purple Wizard (537794) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:21AM (#3323575) Homepage
    I've recently been involved in at least two large-scale projects involving developers in three countries, US, Singapore and India. The timescales were very small; we had to implement one of the systems within 48 hours. A huge coding effort it was, with rapid real-time changes to design specs.

    As much as I hate M$ (hey, I AM a /.-ter after all), I just can't de-emphasise how critical MSN Messenger was during development.

    Only one problem though:- you'll need intense amounts of concentration to ignore junk messages from friends.

    This is one place I'd focus on. You know, perhaps an avatar sort of thing; in your programming (work) avatar, you are online to only a certain people. In your chillout avatar, you are online to everyone. The programming avatar also could have an auto-message feature:- perhaps one that delivers a message to the tester once you finish coding a class or something.

    Any open source Jabber-related projects out there working on this?
  • by mosch (204) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:23AM (#3323591) Homepage
    Jabber seems like such a good idea at first, you may find somebody in your corporation saying 'hey, let's run a jabber server internally instead of using desk phones, cell phones, email or our shoes.' Let me be very clear about this, if somebody says this, even if they make it sound good, they should be fired on the spot.

    Problem Number One: The server sucks. Once you start using jabber, you get the joy of watching your client disconnect for no apparent reason, quite regularly.

    Problem Number Two: The gateways suck. Jabber has a cool concept where it can provide a gateway to other instant messengers, such as AIM. They crash. A lot. Additionally, you'll find that the jabber gateways can't block senders, so remember that psychopath who is suing the company and you don't want to even know if he's trying to contact you? Too fucking bad, suddenly his messages pop right up.

    Problem Number Three: The client sucks. First of all, it crashes (have you noticed a pattern here, yet?), and secondly it has a terrible concept of what should happen to window focus when an incoming message arrives.

    Problem Number Four: It's not neccessary. Everybody already has a desk phone, a cell phone and email. Many people also have pagers, wireless email and such. The problem isn't a lack of methods with which to communicate. Adding jabber will not make your company more competitive, reduce costs, improve communication or improve morale.

    The moral of the story? Shoot anybody who uses jabber, and you'll save yourself a lot of trouble in the long run.

  • by zsa (183365) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:27AM (#3323610)
    the approach this book takes is that Jabber isn't just an XML-based protocol strictly for IM, rather it is a general purpose event notification protocol that has some very nice message routing and user management features built into it.

    There was a "jabber as middleware" (JAM) intiative going on last year. Not sure if it's still active. My understanding is that it intended to morph jabber into a middleware message router which would have connectivity to the desktop.

    What's always confused me about this approach is that there are already plenty of messaging systems out there. It might make more sense to shim a Jabber protocol adapter in front of an existing JMS implementation.

  • AIM (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Hemos (editor) (569506) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:30AM (#3323638) Homepage
    There's a lot of discussion about how Jabber hackers stopped working toward AIM integration.

    The problem as I see it is that when most developers of these alternative IM clients try to hook into AOL's chat network, they do so the wrong way. AOL has a public protocol, and a private protocal; so, unless you want to worry about spending an hour or two every night working around the latest block that AOL institutes against your illegal hook into their private network, just use the public one that's documented and encouraged by the AOL folks.

    So, Jabber people -- get AIM integration working via their public network rather than just dumping the whole thing because you can't hack their private area. The only downside is that users can't view others' away messages, which isn't really that big of a deal (if they're there, you can talk; if not, you'll see they're away but not necessarily why they're AFK).

    I say this only because many of the comments so far are along the lines of "I used to use Jabber until AIM stopped working...". I for one would like to use Jabber as well and encourage them to rethink their approach to TOC and OSCAR.

    An All-Linux Think Tank > Lycoris Review Part 1 of 2 Is Now Available [monolinux.com]
    • Re:AIM (Score:4, Informative)

      by Temas (30015) on Thursday April 11 2002, @01:53PM (#3324550) Homepage
      I beg to differ. I develop the AIM Transport. I've also worked on libfaim, and was around for the initial introduction of TOC. TOC looked promising despite it's odd ASCII protocol, but we continued work on OSCAR because TOC was considered a side project and not 100% supported by AOL. As luck would have it AOL has proved that decision to be wise many times. They have stopped work on TOC numerous times and have even removed features from it. OSCAR has continued to grow. When AOL started to try and block us (Jabber) we grew fairly confident that their changes were directed solely at Jabber. The blocks always happened after minute changes I made in the aim source specifically, and we were told so in an indirect way. Some ended up affecting other libfaim based projects such as Gaim. Until everything was figured out I was heavily considering a TOC implementation. The problem was that would have caused problems for other programs using TOC if they continued to actively target Jabber. I decided this type of behaivour would be unfair to the other projects, and it continues to allow them to always have a "pure" channel. In the end it has all worked out. We have fully figured out their attempted blocks and everything seems to be moving forward. There are specific IP blocks on some of the larger Jabber servers, but that's life.

      Currently I'm actively working on the AIM-Transport (more information [jabberstudio.org]). and expect to put out a version 0.10 in not too long.
      [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Jabber is a hack (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ProfessorPuke (318074) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:37AM (#3323692)
    As are all "Instant Message" programs. They are a poorly-designed, short-sighted solution to a problem that should've been addressed elsewhere in the internet architecture.

    Part of the problem stems from the fact that IM software addresses 2 applications at the same time, unnecessarily coupling the implementations. These problems could really be approached separately:

    • Learn the IP address associated with a globally-unique username
    • Send a text message to the interactive operator of a machine with an IP address
    The first problem is the much more interesting one- Jabber & AIM already somewhat solve it, but in an unsatisfactory and poorly extensible way. Better solutions would be based on an extension to the normal DNS system- essentially, you want each human to have a resolvable domain name associated with her. With that in place, InstantMessaging is an easy problem.

    A person could try to implement "TCP over IM", but it would've been nicer if the systems had been designed for this from the start. Actually, there is a 3rd general-purpose facility that might be needed, for reasons of privacy. There should be a way to send a packet to a "resolvable human name", without knowing the IP address it currently maps through. The (trusted) central server will have to forward packets in both directions. (I think that's how AIM normally operates, except that it doesn't accept generic packets, only AIM-formatted messages).

    However, that method doesn't uniformly improve privacy. While it does prevent other users from learning your IP address, it makes it much easier for AOL (or other central server operator) to spy on the contents of your discussions. (You should be using encryption, anyway).

    • IPv6 by Ilan Volow (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @12:39PM
      • Re:IPv6 by styxlord (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @11:53PM
    • Re:Jabber is a hack (Score:4, Interesting)

      by devnullkac (223246) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:39PM (#3324091) Homepage
      Learn the IP address associated with a globally-unique username
      Unfortunately, the user identification problem is complicated by the fact that there may be more than one person using a given IP address. Firewalls which implement NAT and servers which have multiple simultaneous logins are quite common and give this complication real teeth.

      You could perhaps claim that the task is really to associate an IP address and TCP/UDP port with a person, but you can only realistically use one service per port (port 80 overloading notwithstanding), so you'd have to say that the identification is solely for IM, and so the solution of the problem isn't really useful outside IM applications.

      Or you could instead say that the task is to associate an IP address and TCP/UDP port with a person and a service, but now you've got the problem of identifying all services and handling the dynamic nature of port assignment as users become available/unavailable and declare themselves as participating/not participating in the various services. Not impossible, but hard enough that nobody seems to have solved it yet.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Jabber is a hack (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Temas (30015) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:44PM (#3324118) Homepage
      I think you're failing to grasp some of the points of Jabber [jabber.org] messaging, especially as something more than basic chat. The idea (at least from the Jabber [jabber.org] point of view) is to _NOT_ learn the IP address of the other party. You only reference them from their "username". Username is the wrong term though, we user the term JID (Jabber [jabber.org] id). The JID format is: username@host/resource. So it is built upon a DNS like system. Once you know another users JID you can interact with it using messaging, presence, or other methods. The power of not trying to interact with an IP directly is it's ability to more cleanly go around firewalls. The client makes a connection outside of the firewall to their Jabber [jabber.org] server (potentially through some proxy), and they are then on the entire Jabber [jabber.org] network. Applications that are exposed on the network then have the ability to interactively use presence and a clear path to the user for more complete interaction. So perhaps you are looking at this from the wrong viewpoint?
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Jabber is a hack by iabervon (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @01:22PM
    • Re:Jabber is a hack by Asprin (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:00PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Jabber is a hack by dekraved (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:53PM
    • Jabber routes messages by Earlybird (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @05:32PM
    • Re:Jabber is a hack by sql*kitten (Score:2) Friday April 12 2002, @05:15AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 4555 pages (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:39AM (#3323695)
    ...really?
    • Re:4555 pages by Big Sean O (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @01:14PM
  • Shhh (Score:1)

    by 21mhz (443080) <mikhail.zabaluev+slashdot@gmail.com> on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:44AM (#3323723) Journal
    Please, everyone, don't tell CNN about Jabber.
    If the journos learn that it's a new haven for "HACKERS", where they *gasp* can use encryption, our asses will burn.
  • Not that hard.. (Score:1)

    by dmouritsendk (321667) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:13PM (#3323940)
    If I build a Jabber solution, it will be in java, so PERL/TK samples don't do me a lot of good

    Dont read the syntax, read the semantics ;)

    (May i suggest maybe looking at Dr. Robert Sebastas exellent book "Concepts of programming languages"(isbn: 0-201-38596-1))
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Jabber shortcomings - not in the book (Score:5, Informative)

    by mgkimsal2 (200677) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:37PM (#3324078) Homepage
    The book, from what I read of it (not 100% - maybe 60%) is handy, but didn't tell me much beyond the jabber documentation already out there.

    What seems to be a huge issue for Jabber is user profile integration with databases. There seems to be an unsupported mysql hack, but the key is 'unsupported'. If you look in the Jabber mail list archives, every month there's people asking how to do it, but NEVER any answers.

    Another great one that doesn't get answered - which the book doesn't address either - is the format of the user XML files. Each user by default has an XML file, and many people would like to create them programatically. There is no definitive resource which explains what's in a file and what isn't, and how to put one together. I've hacked something, and it works, but only after several attemps, and it doesn't *feel* good. I'm hesitant to try to add anything else lest I break what's working.

    Jabber.com has a huge vested interest in keeping some of this stuff not in the public knowledgebase, because they charge (comparitively) a LOT of money for their stuff.

    Last time I spoke with them the minimum to get started was $16,000. Their package offers a completely rewritten jabber server (better thread handling), Oracle and LDAP connectors, and a good Java applet client.

    NO ONE in the open source community has even come close to having a Java applet client that is workable in a practical sense.

    So yes, the protocol is open, and free, but there doesn't seem to be much consensus on tools, except from Jabber.com and they cost.

    What I think Jabber as an open source project needs to focus on:

    * XML user file definition and/or database support for user profiles
    * Good applet client

    :)
    • by Temas (30015) on Thursday April 11 2002, @01:31PM (#3324429) Homepage
      I like to make sure that all questions asked on our (jabber.org) jdev and jadmin mailing lists get answered. Sometimes the questions will get answered in our groupchat, or in other ways, but an answer is usually given.

      As far as I know xdb_sql currently lacks a maintainer, but it's open source so maybe someone will pick it up.

      The lack of good docs on the user file definition is valid, but at the same time it's not suggested you edit it by hand due to the aggressive cacheing used on it. We're starting a new docs effort right now and I'll make sure this is on the list.

      The basic applet that is on sourceforge (here [sourceforge.net]) is focussed on simplicity, but it does work, and I know people have built more off of it.

      As to your concerns with Jabber, Inc., I don't know why they would want to keep any of that stuff secret. It's mostly useless to them since their server ships with a different XDB backend and their web client has a different focus than a pure applet approach.
      [ Parent ]
      • by mgkimsal2 (200677) on Thursday April 11 2002, @04:03PM (#3325508) Homepage
        Thank you for your response.

        The basic applet is just far *too* basic to be of much use to our situation (and I guess many others). For starters, it assumes you want to allow people to create an account on your server - there seems to be no way to shut that off in the client.

        The person I spoke with at Jabber.com told me they'd completely rewritten the jabber server to be high-volume capable, but that they wouldn't be releasing that code. Possibly ever, or possibly just much later. It's an investment for them, and they have every reason *to* keep is secret. If it's open, and people could implement it themselves, why would they pay Jabber.com?

        I wasn't wanting to edit the user XML files by hand, but create them programmatically for users.

        I've see the jdev lists and it looks like most questions get answered, but I'd gone looking and never found an answers on the xml file structure for user files, but many questions about it.

        Again, thanks for answering. :)
        [ Parent ]
    • Re:Jabber shortcomings - not in the book by tzanger (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @02:42PM
    • I tried to do the db stuff once... by willis (Score:1) Thursday April 11 2002, @06:33PM
    • Re:Jabber shortcomings - not in the book by mgkimsal2 (Score:2) Thursday April 11 2002, @03:36PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Java Oriented Jabber Book (Score:5, Informative)

    by Temas (30015) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:54PM (#3324162) Homepage
    I've seen a lot of comments disliking the abundance of Perl/Tk usage in DJ's book. Recently Manning Publications [manning.com] released Instant Messaging in JAVA: The Jabber Protocols [manning.com] in print and ebook. It was written by Iain Shigeoka, and is ISBN 1-930110-46-4. It's a good read and goes over the creation of both a client and a basic server in Java, plus a good deal more.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by jacobb (93907) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:58PM (#3324188) Homepage
    I used jabber extensively for a while about a year and a half to a year ago. Only on my Windows partition, however.


    Well, apart from WinJab being clunky and having memory leaks, etc....
    My problem with jabber was that both the ICQ and AIM transports were always broken. Occasionally one would work, but it would usually break in less than an hour!

    I hear that they've taken the main server's transports off - can anyone tell me the performance of other servers' transports that I've heard about. How about the best small, simple windows client.
    I'm looking for something that starts up immediately, is small, elegant and doesn't vacuum up my memory.

    Cheers!

  • by whterbt (211035) <m6d07iv02@sneakemail.com> on Thursday April 11 2002, @01:26PM (#3324397)
    machines and programs can use a general purpose communication system like this, with no human middleman required

    Imagine the possibilities - we could have a global network of computers and other devices that communicate through a common protocol! Oh, wait...

    Reminds me of the "TCP over HTTP" April Fool's RFC.
  • language (Score:2)

    by geekoid (135745) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {dnaltropnidad}> on Thursday April 11 2002, @01:30PM (#3324426) Homepage Journal
    "I think equal time should be given to implementing Jabber using the two most-used languages, "

    assembly and C?
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by Robotron2084 (262343) on Thursday April 11 2002, @04:58PM (#3325975) Homepage
    "While i was reading about the messages that Jabber has defined as part of the protocol, I could easily see other applications/devices generating Jabber messages to notify subscribers (either other systems, or people) of events.

    I wish people would stop thinking about Jabber as simply an instant messenger, in the same way Microsoft has realised that MSN Messenger isn't simply an instant messenger. The data exchange of .NET is instant messaging, and Jabber epitomizes the open source equivalent.

    As things move on from static HTTP GETS to dynamic sockets, companies will look for products that can easily push and pull data asynchronously to servers. And Jabber excels at this.

    Jabber's modular framework allows for the simple server-side creation and client-side discovery of whatever xml namespaces you'd like for whatever programs you make. As in the book, you can receive CVS commit notifications, stock quote notices or send and receive email with Jabber.
  • Coincidence (Score:2)

    by ahde (95143) on Thursday April 11 2002, @06:49PM (#3326648) Homepage
    just yesterday the security bigwigs at the corp i work at sent down a draconian letter about instant messenger programs wasting bandwidth, and more importantly, exposing proprietary information on the internet.

    A little over a year ago instant messenger clients were banned "without specific authorization" and were heavily used contraband. Now MSN Messenger is a vital part (and defacto standard) of corporate communications. Unfortunately there is a lot of productivity lost from A) Microsoft's shitty network that doesn't deliver near as many messages as you'd expect, and fails to report errors... and B) lots of information that is generated in impromptu conversations and lost when the chat is done. Then there is also C) the waste of bandwidth and D) the security and privacy issues.

    Back in the contraband days I whipped up a quick VB program for our group, and was in the process of converting it to a java applet with direct socket layer communication when MSN Messenger was finally let in.

    When the new email came down, I quickly responded with a link to imici.com for a solution and then threw in jabber.org and mentioned it as a free alternative. Any one of the above reasons (A-D) is enough to switch, but maybe not enough to overcome the inertia of MSN un-emoticons.

  • by Reez (65123) on Thursday April 11 2002, @07:20PM (#3326784)
    I had to work on Jabber with other guys, we were paid for that. I wrote the first version of xdb_sql. But working on Jabber was such a PITA that I left coding and never looked back. Sound coding standards are a must for any ambitious project. So give jabber hacking a try ... You'll see what I mean. At least, when you stop, what a relief ! :)
  • plus... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Avery_Zero (544068) on Thursday April 11 2002, @11:57AM (#3323819)
    Jabber is not just an IM client, it's also the server/protocol. Thus you can implement an IM solution where it would otherwise be impractical or pose a security hazard. I work for a medical firm, and the security issues with sending patient/sensitive information over a third-party IM network are enough to give people nightmares. They don't scare me, though. cause it's something that I would NEVER EVER allow to happen in my network.

    Trillian, OTOH, while it's a great program (I use it myself) is nothing more than a combined front-end client for the existing IM services. Trillian will not help you when you are in a situation where opening a hole in the firewall for IM traffic is just not feasible (assuming that your networked office has Internet access to begin with, and that is NOT a given in the health care field)


    AveryZero

    [ Parent ]
  • by ginxd (557681) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:00PM (#3323838)
    adv for jabber: 1. open source 2. modulised 3. secure 4. logically well defined protocol 5. easily expandable language 6. based on xml 7. NOT OS specific 8. supports MORE chat protocols adv for trillian: 1. it looks good
    [ Parent ]
  • by Strog (129969) on Thursday April 11 2002, @12:27PM (#3324025) Homepage Journal
    You talking about the server or a particular client?

    There are dozens of clients for you to check out if you don't like a particular one. Trillian is great if you are on Windows but what are you going to do on any other platform?

    [ Parent ]
  • 12 replies beneath your current threshold.