3 ms·
> if someone had just jammed XMPP and SMTP together. Xmpp is/supports federated/ion (user1@server1.com can message user2@server2.com). But the major players (
by e12e 8y ago
> if someone had just jammed XMPP and SMTP together.
Xmpp is/supports federated/ion (user1@server1.com can message user2@server2.com).
But the major players (by numbers) wanted silos: Google (talk) and fasebook (first gen of messenger).
They basically went lol, screw users (arguably because: spam. But hello, Gmail? And today fb spam...).
So thank Google and Facebook for deliberately gimping it so you can't fb message user@gmail.com or gtalk first name.lastname123@facebook.com.
- rakoo 8y agoThe official reason for Google to give up on this is that there was a real problem of incoming spam from lousy domains, and no major player wanted to play the federation game with them. It's not as simple as you make it sound.
- e12e 8y ago1) they are able (forced to) handle spam for Gmail (and internally for gtalk) - I'm not convinced by the spam argument. 2) there were only two "big" players, Google and Facebook. The benefit of federation would be as with email: an open internet with federation across organisation level services (community/company run servers). The fact that Google didn't implement ssl for federation doesn't mean people "wouldn't" federate with them, it mean Google didn't make a real effort.