StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Kestrel vs XMPP

Kestrel vs XMPP

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kestrel
Kestrel
Stacks37
Followers58
Votes0
XMPP
XMPP
Stacks71
Followers138
Votes0

Kestrel vs XMPP: What are the differences?

# Comparing Kestrel and XMPP

Kestrel and XMPP are both popular technologies used for communication and messaging systems. However, they have key differences that set them apart from each other.

1. **Protocol**: The main difference between Kestrel and XMPP lies in their underlying protocols. Kestrel uses a custom TCP-based protocol, while XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) is an open-standard communication protocol based on XML.

2. **Scalability**: When it comes to scalability, Kestrel is known for its high performance and efficiency, making it suitable for handling large amounts of data and high traffic loads. On the other hand, XMPP may face scalability issues with a large number of concurrent connections and messages.

3. **Real-time Communication**: XMPP is specifically designed for real-time communication and presence information exchange, making it a preferred choice for instant messaging applications. Kestrel, while capable of real-time messaging, may not have the same level of features for real-time communication.

4. **Extensibility**: XMPP is highly extensible and allows for the integration of additional functionalities and extensions using XML-based protocols. Kestrel, being a custom protocol, may lack the same level of extensibility and flexibility in terms of adding new features.

5. **Authentication and Security**: XMPP provides robust authentication mechanisms and security features, including support for encryption and secure identity verification. Kestrel, being a custom protocol, may not offer the same level of security features out of the box and may require additional customization.

In Summary, Kestrel and XMPP differ in terms of their underlying protocols, scalability, real-time communication capabilities, extensibility, and security features.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Kestrel
Kestrel
XMPP
XMPP

Kestrel is based on Blaine Cook's "starling" simple, distributed message queue, with added features and bulletproofing, as well as the scalability offered by actors and the JVM.

It is a set of open technologies for instant messaging, presence, multi-party chat, voice and video calls, collaboration, lightweight middleware, content syndication, and generalized routing of XML data.

Written by Robey Pointer;Starling clone written in Scala (a port of Starling from Ruby to Scala);Queues are stored in memory, but logged on disk
-
Statistics
Stacks
37
Stacks
71
Followers
58
Followers
138
Votes
0
Votes
0
Integrations
No integrations available
Java
Java
Python
Python
JavaScript
JavaScript

What are some alternatives to Kestrel, XMPP?

Kubernetes

Kubernetes

Kubernetes is an open source orchestration system for Docker containers. It handles scheduling onto nodes in a compute cluster and actively manages workloads to ensure that their state matches the users declared intentions.

Rancher

Rancher

Rancher is an open source container management platform that includes full distributions of Kubernetes, Apache Mesos and Docker Swarm, and makes it simple to operate container clusters on any cloud or infrastructure platform.

Kafka

Kafka

Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Docker Compose

Docker Compose

With Compose, you define a multi-container application in a single file, then spin your application up in a single command which does everything that needs to be done to get it running.

Docker Swarm

Docker Swarm

Swarm serves the standard Docker API, so any tool which already communicates with a Docker daemon can use Swarm to transparently scale to multiple hosts: Dokku, Compose, Krane, Deis, DockerUI, Shipyard, Drone, Jenkins... and, of course, the Docker client itself.

Celery

Celery

Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well.

Tutum

Tutum

Tutum lets developers easily manage and run lightweight, portable, self-sufficient containers from any application. AWS-like control, Heroku-like ease. The same container that a developer builds and tests on a laptop can run at scale in Tutum.

Amazon SQS

Amazon SQS

Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use.

NSQ

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase