Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Delivery of public content to sharedInbox #484

Open
evanp opened this issue Nov 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Delivery of public content to sharedInbox #484

evanp opened this issue Nov 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
Needs FEP Needs a FEP

Comments

@evanp
Copy link
Collaborator

evanp commented Nov 29, 2024

ActivityPub says in section 7.1.3:

Additionally, if an object is addressed to the Public special collection, a server MAY deliver that object to all known sharedInbox endpoints on the network.

This can have the effect that servers which implement sharedInbox endpoints to reduce traffic will get much, much more traffic from public posts of popular servers.

The mechanism for allowing delivery of an activity to all addressees on a single server should be separate from the mechanism for receiving all public activities from a remote server. Combining the two takes a network optimization and make it into a firehose; the exact opposite effect than intended.

@evanp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

evanp commented Nov 29, 2024

I think the best next step here is to define an endpoint that is only for delivering to all addressees at once. Implementers that don't want to receive a firehose to sharedInbox can skip it, and implement to the multipleAddresseeInbox instead.

@evanp evanp added the Needs FEP Needs a FEP label Nov 29, 2024
Copy link

This issue has been labelled as potentially needing a FEP, and contributors are welcome to submit a FEP on the topic.
Note that issues may be closed without the FEP being created; that does not mean that the FEP is no longer needed.

@evanp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

evanp commented Nov 29, 2024

FEP 0499 provides a similar mechanism to the one described.

@trwnh
Copy link

trwnh commented Nov 29, 2024

There are some related paths forward here:

  • Recommend against servers implementing the "deliver to all known sharedInbox endpoints" behavior. This effectively makes an errata from MAY to SHOULD NOT.
  • Recommend against publishing a sharedInbox endpoint if a server is not willing or able to handle additional traffic. This is essentially keeping the spec behavior as-is, but giving guidance on dealing with its effects.
    • Recommend a new endpoint like https://w3id.org/fep/0499/multibox which allows for delivering to multiple inboxes in the same request
    • Or, recommend a different architecture where the server is an actor with its own inbox and it "owns" or "manages" its users, where activities sent to this singular inbox get routed internally to those users based on certain criteria. (Most likely, this would require a mechanism to signal that users are being hosted by a service.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs FEP Needs a FEP
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants