Does anyone here have experience of hosting their own XMPP server through

(Boosts appreciated!)


Not sure what you mean by hosting your own through their hosted service?


I mean managed hosting, as opposed to just signing up for an account on someone else's server.


Sorry, I thought the criteria was self-hosting, rather than managed hosting.

That's awesome and great, and I encourage people to use and I do it myself, but I'd ask what we're going for here- if it's just domain name ownership or something else?

In essence there's no distinction between this and Gmail running your email for you.


Umm... that's not quite fair?

XMPP is an alternative to centralised services like Whatsapp.

Whatsapp traps people on a single server due to the network effect, and forces people to join it against their will for work etc. I am forced to use it every day for a group I volunteer with.

XMPP gives its users far more options:

-sign up on an established server
-switch to another server if the first one misbehaves
-have their own server
-use managed hosting

@homegrown @emacsen

yeah I think this is a great illustration of a point that I've seen people try to make in various ways at various times in various contexts but the essence of which is the same: technology is socially situated and any attempt to draw a hard line around the "techology" parts (hardware, code, pulses of EM down a conduit) to separate it from all the rest (the many so called"soft" skills of writing for people rather than for machines; arranging for documentation and planning; education and onboarding; cooperation and leadership and retention; creation and implementation of policy; and so on leads either to isolated irrelevance or eventual destruction.

running your own instance through managed hosting moves the lexus of autonomy further down the stack from having an account on someone else's instance. It moves the lexus of administration higher up the stack from having root on hardware that sits in your basement or next to the coffee maker or whatever.

It might do to see this more as a continuum, rather than a cleanly bifurcated binary space, with stopping points that also include managing your own server software but on "cloud" resources like AWS, linode, DO, OVH, et al.

@emacsen @homegrown Yes! Imagine a secure and independent internet standard for instant messaging as ubiquitous as email. That's what #XMPP is all about.

@homegrown I've been selfhosting an xmpp server for a couple years now. What I did was install yunohost which includes the metronome xmpp server as part of the base installation. Very easy to get going.

@kelbot @homegrown Yes Yunohost on either your own HW or hosted gives you an XMPP server instantly. The great benefit of Yunohost is that they make it very easy to apply updates to all your installed packages with a few clicks in the web UI. I often do it from my handset once I get an email that they are available.

@bit_tyrant_resistor @homegrown yeah, yunohost is pretty great. Doesn't obscure anything really so you can stil see what's going on when you want to but it saves you from doing everything manually all the time. The helper utilities for backups and installing new apps are super convenient and have been reliable in my experience.

@homegrown I've been using @snikket_im for this and it's been working great! can highly recommend :)


What do you mean by “hosting through”?

#Conversations is an #XMPP client. Do they also offer server hosting?

I have been hosting my own XMPP-server for more than a decade. Earlier I used #ejabberd, but for the past 5+ years I've been using #Prosody, which is a lightweight XMPP-server written in #Lua:


On the desktop I use #Gajim:


On one of my phones I use Conversation, on the other I use #Blabber (a Conversations fork):

@homegrown Oh, thanks, I didn't know that (and it wasn't immediately obvious from the homepage).

Well, I'll be following the thread to see what people think.

@homegrown I've used it for a good while, happy to answer any questions you might have.

@homegrown Self hosting and managed hosting are wildly different and conflating the two leads to a lot of confusion for people who aren't familiar with the space. There's nothing wrong with managed hosting, but calling it self hosting is simply incorrect.


Do you have a preferred collective term for people who use their own server, whether managed or not?


Also, do you have a take on whether self-hosting has to be on your own hardware, or is it still self-hosting if it's in a data centre?

It would be good to have agreed terms for all these scenarios, and also a collective term to distinguish them from people who sign up on someone else's server and have no control at all over it.


> Do you have a preferred collective term for people who use their own server, whether managed or not?

In this situation, it's *not* their own server; that distinction is important because the only thing they actually control is the domain. Self hosting and managed hosting are so different that I don't think bundling them together under one term is useful.

I don't even think "indie hosters" would be a good fit because people paying for Conversations' hosting aren't exactly independent; if they decide to leave, they can take their domain with them but not the actual data. That remains on Conversations' servers.

This kind of managed hosting is effectively the same as using your own domain with Gmail. You have no control over what's being done behind the scenes. With self hosting you have *complete* control.

Again, they're both fine and I'm not saying one is better than the other; I think they are fundamentally different and bundling them together under a single umbrella term does each a disservice.

> Also, do you have a take on whether self-hosting has to be at home or is it still self-hosting if it's in a data centre?

This is kind of the same situation as self hosting vs managed hosting. Running your own hardware at home and dealing with that mess is very different from offloading it to someone in a data centre. Most people (myself included) are specifically referring to software when they say they're self-hosting something.

So maybe it would be useful to distinguish between self hosted and managed software and self hosted and managed hardware? I run Nextcloud on a NAS in my bedroom so it would be fully self-hosted. I run Akkoma in a data center in Finland so it would be self hosted software and managed hardware … half-hosted? :cyannyan_question:


I don't have a good solution but I do think separation between managed hosting and self hosting is important lol


The way you're phrasing this, you're making it out that people who don't have a home server might as well just use Google.

I appreciate you're probably not intending this, but using Gmail as an example sort of implies this inadvertently.

I don't think saying Google is the same as an indie hoster is useful because of this.

"Indie hoster" refers to the company's independence. A hosting company is independent if it is not owned or controlled by anyone else.



(I think also there's confusion here because "server" on the Fediverse can mean instance or a piece of hardware.)

Just focusing on the names, what terms do we use for each of these scenarios?

1) Person signs up for an account on someone else's instance.

2) Person buys their own instance through a managed hosting company

3) Person installs their own instance on a VPS in a data centre

4) Person installs their own instance on a computer in their own home

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Single-user Mastodon instance for the Grow Your Own Services site