DesignXMPP arch
Version 26 (Anonymous, 03/07/2012 04:49 pm)
| 1 | 17 | Adrian Georgescu | = Gateway Architecture = |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 1 | ||
| 3 | 25 | Adrian Georgescu | [[TOC(DesignXMPP, DesignXMPP_analysis, DesignXMPP_arch, DesignXMPP_im, , DesignXMPP_conference, DesignXMPP_presence, DesignXMPP_jingle,DesignXMPP_ft, depth=2)]] |
| 4 | 9 | ||
| 5 | 24 | Adrian Georgescu | Due to the dedicated server architecture of XMPP and requirements for availabiliy of public DNS entries for the target domain, is not possible to position the gateway between two clients. The architecture of the SIP-XMPP gateway can be modeled in two different ways, both dependent on the way XMPP server is deployed: |
| 6 | 1 | ||
| 7 | 1 | * Based on an XMPP server (using server-to-server communication) |
|
| 8 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | * Based on an XMPP component connected to an existing XMPP server |
| 9 | 1 | ||
| 10 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | These approaches are not mutually exclusive, they could potentially be implemented and decide which one to use by setting a configuration option. |
| 11 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 12 | 1 | ||
| 13 | 22 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 14 | 1 | == XMPP Server Based Architecture == |
|
| 15 | 1 | ||
| 16 | 26 | [[Image(xmppgw-arch-server.png, 700px)]] |
|
| 17 | 1 | ||
| 18 | 1 | * SIP Application server which is also a XMPP server |
|
| 19 | 1 | * SIP proxy (registration, AAA and routing) |
|
| 20 | 1 | ||
| 21 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | == XMPP Component Based Architecture == |
| 22 | 15 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 23 | 26 | [[Image(xmppgw-arch-component.png, 700px)]] |
|
| 24 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 25 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | * XMPP server (ejabberd for example) |
| 26 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | * XMPP server plugin (divert stanzas to offline users to a given component) |
| 27 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | * SIP Application server which is also a XMPP component |
| 28 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | * SIP proxy (registration, AAA and routing) |
| 29 | 21 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 30 | 15 | Adrian Georgescu | == Chosen Architecture == |
| 31 | 6 | ||
| 32 | 16 | Adrian Georgescu | After experimenting with both models the chosen model to be implemented first is the '''XMPP server based architecture'''. The component based approach could be added at a later time. |
| 33 | 6 | ||
| 34 | 16 | Adrian Georgescu | The server based architecture model has a number of advantages / disadvantages: |
| 35 | 6 | ||
| 36 | 6 | * Advantages |
|
| 37 | 6 | * Less network elements involved |
|
| 38 | 6 | * Full control over XMPP routing since the server is customized |
|
| 39 | 6 | * No need for developing plugins for any XMPP server |
|
| 40 | 6 | * Disadvantages: |
|
| 41 | 6 | * Inability to use an XMPP client in the local domain |
|
| 42 | 7 | ||
| 43 | 1 | The critical factor when making this choice is the fact that if a custom XMPP server is built all the routing logic can be customized without the need of running an extra XMPP server and writing a plugin for it. Thus, this approach is more sustainable over time. |
|
| 44 | 20 | Adrian Georgescu | |
| 45 | 20 | Adrian Georgescu | The aforementioned disadvantage would also disappear if the chosen library implemented accepting XMPP client connections, which is likely to happen in the future. |