4 ms·

No, see the diagram (https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/websub-overview.svg https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/websub-overview.svg): publisher tells the hub "here's the new

by rakoo 8y ago

No, see the diagram (https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/websub-overview.svg https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/websub-overview.svg): publisher tells the hub "here's the new content", the hub is in charge of contacting each and every subscriber telling them "here's the new content". Only the hub _could_ be overwhelmed, but it works at its own rhythm so it has more control. The thundering herd happens when you have an incontrollable influx of traffic coming in, and you have no way to regulate it.

antpls 8y ago
This is ridiculous. Any big enough palteforms such as Medium or Reuters will already partner with CDN, cloud firewalls, automatic provisioning, etc to handle traffic. For small self-hosted blogs, authors can pay a CDN that will absorb any exceptional loads and almost cost nothing the rest of the time. Eventually the blog will go down for 24h and will be back online when things get calmer. The idea of creating a hub that will be a central point is the opposite of distributed information.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- VoxPelli 8y ago
  Funny that Medium then decided to buy a company that was built around WebSub and was founded by one of the authors of the spec: https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/super-to-medium/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/super-to-medium/ Seems like they do find some use for it? (As does eg Google who has it as the preferred real-time deliver mechanism for sitemaps.)
  - antpls 8y ago
    > (As does eg Google who has it as the preferred real-time deliver mechanism for sitemaps.) Again, totally random fact without any single source to prove it. WebSub basically comes from the need of that one entreprise? Does it worth making it a W3C specification?