incubator-esme-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Hirsch <hirsch.d...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: pubsubhubbub
Date Sat, 22 May 2010 08:40:46 GMT
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, the problem is that PubSubHubbub is predicated on the existence of a
> feed (either RSS or Atom). I think it would be workable for the API for
> public content,


Yep my thoughts exactly. Public messages could be made available.


> but otherwise I also see the authentication issue as a big
> problem. I'm pretty sure that some patterns are emerging for authenticated
> content using PubSubHubbub, but I don't think that aspect is very mature
> yet, so we're probably better off waiting another 6 months rather than
> trying to invent something ourselves.
>
> Ethan
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> We would be a subscriber, though we could conceivably set up actions
> or
> > >> something else that acts as a publisher as well. It's one of the
> options
> > >> for
> > >> really stream-ifying the API.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I think an action that publishes would be perfect.
> > >
> >
> > I was looking at the slides here (http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/) and
> > the
> > last slide has details for a publisher:
> >
> >
> >   - Publish Atom feeds with their content
> >   - Include Hub forwarding information in feeds (optional)
> >   - POST updates to Subscribers and Hubs (optional)
> >
> >
> > I think an action by itself wouldn't be enough. I also don't know how
> > authentication might work with Atom.
> >
> >
> > >> This would only affect RSS/Atom actions. The way those actions
> currently
> > >> work is that they poll an RSS feed when they are triggered. We almost
> > >> always
> > >> set them up to run regularly using an "every 5 mins" test, for
> example.
> > >> PubSubHubbub gets rid of the need to poll at all, since the hub will
> > >> automatically notify the ESME instance every time the feed is updated.
> > >>
> > >> This would kind of change the semantics of the RSS/Atom actions from
> > being
> > >> an action to being more of a test, actually. Interesting. Not sure if
> > this
> > >> is what we want. Does anyone use RSS/Atom actions with a test other
> than
> > >> "every X mins"?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Doubt it
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Ethan
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Richard Hirsch <
> hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> > >> >wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Sounds way cool - so if I understand PSHB  correctly - we would then
> > be
> > >> a
> > >> > subscriber as well as a publisher?  Why I don't completely
> understand
> > is
> > >> > the
> > >> > connection to actions? Would there be a PHSB action that sends
> > messages
> > >> to
> > >> > a
> > >> > hub?
> > >> >
> > >> > D.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Not very far, but enough to build on, and I plan to keep going
> once
> > >> I'm
> > >> > on
> > >> > > my sabbatical (starting in 1 week!!). There is a branch in the
svn
> > >> > > repository that has all my progress in it.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The basic approach was in to parts:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 1. Add an indicator to the action that the feed is PSHB-enabled
> > >> > (determined
> > >> > > by analyzing the feed when the action is polled), and in this
case
> > we
> > >> > would
> > >> > > never start the poller. Instead we would initiate a subscription.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2. The second half was to add a PSHB handler that could receive
> > >> callbacks
> > >> > > from hubs related to specific actions and post messages based
on
> > these
> > >> > > callbacks.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I think I got about 1/3 done with each of these tasks :-)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > An additional nice-to-have would be to implement use of the
> optional
> > >> > > signing
> > >> > > scheme for hubs that support it, though this is not necessary
to
> > reach
> > >> > our
> > >> > > current level of security.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Ethan
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Richard Hirsch <
> > >> hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> > >> > > >wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > @Ethan: Out of curiosity, how far did you get on your
> pubsubhubbub
> > >> > > > implementation?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > D.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message