3 ms·
I saw this mentioned somewhere else the other day and checked it out. Seems immature to me, something about the lack of structure in their messages, the loose t
by therein 4y ago
I saw this mentioned somewhere else the other day and checked it out. Seems immature to me, something about the lack of structure in their messages, the loose ties to the type enum that they have for messages, feels as if it is not thoroughly thought out.
- ursuscamp 4y agoIt’s something we’re building in real time, as we use it. If you visit the NIPs repo, you will see it changing by the idea. As the clients and relays try things, ideas propagate quickly. In that sense it is extremely exciting.
- therein 4y agoIt is definitely interesting and exciting, at least the end goal. I am still not sold on the architecture but I want to be. So relays are not able to talk to one another and if I want to be able to interact with another user in any way, we have to be sharing a relay, right? These seem like really strong limitations to me and I am having a hard time understanding why they exist. Why not start with some relay-to-relay capabilities as well like XMPP has?
- CodexArcana 4y agoRelays are not prohibited from communicating with each other. There just isn't a defined and agreed on method to do so. Maybe there never will be. But that doesn't mean you can't build a relay server that has a replication feature. It would simply be proprietary.
- ursuscamp 4y agoI believe multiple relay operators are currently working on R2R communication. It will probably be pretty common soon.