[37302] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Instant chats and central servers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (poptix)
Tue May 8 18:21:40 2001
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 22:11:07 +0200 (CEST)
From: poptix <poptix@poptix.net>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20010508183527.13405.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105082205330.444-100000@3jane.ashpool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Honestly if your company/NOC/whatever is going
to use something like this to communicate, I would
recommend running your own server, I've worked on
financial institutions networks that actually used
AIM for communications (ie, JoeBob: Can you change
the PIN # on account XYZ to 1234 MarySue: Sure),
and used a hotmail address for their ACH! (Automatic
Checking withdrawl/deposit) it's insanely irresponsible
to use a third party messaging service for anything
that your customers information could pass through.
FYI, there are ICQ servers you can run locally, but
not for AIM or MSN, I would suggest an IRC server.
Matthew S. Hallacy
(if you're still in doubt, feel free to go read AOL
and MSN's ToS for their messaging services)
On 8 May 2001, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> A question (and a test to see if I'm still subscribed)
>
> The various instant messenging services, such as AIM, ICQ, Microsoft,
> Yahoo, other Messenger uses a central server to manage "presence".
>
> No central server appears to mean no instant messages, am I correct?
>
> What does this have to do with NANOG, apparently it is becoming more
> common for backbone NOC folks to communicate with their friends in
> other NOCs via one of these instant chat programs. I didn't realize
> how common it was until I was informed about it last month when AOL/AIM
> had difficulties. This month Yahoo Messenger had power difficulties,
> which disrupted their central servers.
>
> If folks are using this these services for real-time communications,
> should we be trying to improve their reliability? Or is this just a
> "feature" of how presence services work.
>
>
>
