Presence and IntComm WG

[Xiaotao Wu <>]

inline.

On Tue, 17 May 2005, Candace Holman wrote:

> In anticipation of this week's conference call, Ben and I have been
> discussing some of the advantages of using a presence agent over using peer
> to peer communication.  I question some of the advantages that I came up,
> so please comment on this list.  Also, please add to this list if you know
> of additional advantages.
>
> 1. Reduced traffic, more scaleable as number of peers rises

I would say 'reduced traffic as number of each user's end devices rises'.
If every user has only one PUA, there is no traffic reduction (in fact,
more traffic because the PUA needs to send PUBLISH to the PA).
In terms of scalability, why a centralized model is more scaleable? In
fact, if every user has only one PUA, as the number of peers rises, P2P is
more scalable.

>
> 2. Reduced access control administration (traffic comes from single source)
>
> 3. Synthesized multi-ua information (presence update merging when multiple
> devices are used by a single presentity)
>
> 4. Identity assurance (not strongly authenticated, but some assurance of
> intradomain identity)
>
> 5. Centrally managed contact lists and blacklists (not yet in PIC-SER)
>
> 6. Partial presence publishing (not yet in PIC-SER, not sure this has to be
> centralized either)

Yes, this has to be centralized. Each PUA uses PUBLISH to send its status
to its PA and the PA do the composing.

Thanks!

-Xiaotao

>
> Thanks,
> Candace
>
>