Wednesday, June 23, 2004

Interoperability for Instant Messaging

You would think by now, after years of immature squabbling from the likes of industry titans such as AOL (not!), Yahoo and Microsoft, that the public would be able to send and receive I.M. to one another, regardless of client brand. The protocol is all the same! How sad is it that we even need a trillian?

Not only that, isn't it also time for a credible I.M. gateway for businesses to appear on the market? Before all I.M. can be truly trans-firewall (as it must be in order to be worth using) we need functionalized extranet-based devices that can make lookup and routing decisions. The same idea is behind the way DNS works. I'll let you find someone if they want to be found, and if you're on legitimate business. But we're not going to just let you cast about in search of destinations to ping and spam!

Imagine the bad craziness if folks were allowed to behave similarly with the SMTP protocol?! Messaging militarized the way the Silk Road was ... oh wait, the grapevine tells me already that HotMail and others are refusing to deliver all Gmail-originated traffic, in spite of the will of senders and recipients to play nice.

Sheesh.

1 Comments:

Blogger Guy said...

Hey hey, lookee here! Can I call 'em or what?

http://msn-cnet.com.com/IM+giants+drop+some+barriers+to+peace/2100-1032_3-5270067.html?part=msn-cnet&subj=ns_5270067&tag=msn_home>1=4244

2:14 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home