<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>metajack - Latest Comments in Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.disqus.com/</link><description>a blog about startups and code</description><atom:link href="https://metajack.disqus.com/thoughts_on_scalable_xmpp_bots/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 11:06:00 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568165</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I want to host a xmpp bot.&lt;br&gt;Will I be able to connect xmpp through http proxy ?&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">spsneo</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 11:06:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568164</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Just to third, confirmed ejabberd round robin load balancing components.  But it *seems* like you could re-use the your presumably more sophisticated (and possibly implemented in hard ware) load balancing infrastructures if you move to s2s.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Of course, sophistication is just another word for more ways to break down :)&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kellan</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:16:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568163</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes ejabberd does round robin load balancing of components registered as the same component name.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ezra</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:36:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568162</link><description>&lt;p&gt;@anders: So if multiple component connections occur with the same component name, ejabberd will automatically round robin?  If so, that at least solves the load balancing piece for ejabberd.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">metajack</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:58:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568161</link><description>&lt;p&gt;My understanding is that at least in Ejabberd the current implementation round-robins components. Providing at least some degree of protection for availability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;~ Anders&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anders conbere</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:56:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Thoughts On Scalable XMPP Bots</title><link>http://metajack.im/2008/08/04/thoughts-on-scalable-xmpp-bots/#comment-4568160</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Jack, that's a good overview -- thanks for posting!&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Peter Saint-Andre</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:58:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>