Re: ICQ Replacement?

[Ka-shu Wong <kswong bigpond com>]

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Shawn Leas wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Ka-shu Wong wrote:
> 
> > Each user will have an address in the form of username@server.address ,
> > where server.address is the DNS address of their 'home' server.  Probably
> > using the @ to separate the username and the address isnt a good idea,
> > since it could be confused with email address, but that can be worked out
> > later... Having a home server solves the problem of having a single 
> > central server that can break down easily.  It also allows the possibility
> > that ISPs can run the servers as a service for their users, in much the
> > same way that ISPs provide email addresses for their customers.
> 
> So where is the root service?  To have the functionality of ICQ, things
> will have to take on a real DNS/IRC sort of topology, because the location
> of the user [as far as server goes] should be irrelevant.

Actually, it would be more similar to the way SMTP servers operate (if
i understand them correctly)... ie a server querying the status of a user
on another server would look up the address of that server via DNS and
connect directly to it.

> 
> > The status of a user is determined by querying their home server.
> > Messages can also be delivered in much the same way, being relayed to the
> > recipients' home servers from where the message is retrieved.
> 
> Maybe I just didn't read that right...  Did I?

Maybe I didnt say it right... anyway, ignore the bit about messages, that
was a bit confused.  Its just an idea.

> 
> > The server also maintains a 'list' of people that the user has authorised
> > to be on his contact list, and only responds to queries from the
> > authorised users.  This also allows for the possibility of revoking
> > someone's authorisation, which is useful sometimes.
> 
> This is sounding like an extended 'talk and finger' client.  That is, if I
> read it right.

Yes kind of, but neither of those provide the functionality provided by
ICQ.

> 
> > Anyway, thanks for reading this far, and if you have any ideas, please
> > reply. And of course there will be a GNOME-aware client... :)
> 
> No prob, I have NO life.
> 

=)

KS