[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Roster Versioning

[Dave Cridland]

On Mon Mar 10 21:33:18 2008, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> 
> On Mar 10, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
>> 1) How does the client know that it's got all the updates?
> 
> How does a client know it has all of its presence?  It doesn't, and  
> it  doesn't matter.  

I'm not convinced it doesn't matter in that case, either.

> Same thing here.  What's the difference between these  roster  
> pushes and any other roster push?
> 
> 
These definitely happened in the past.


>> 2) Doesn't this mean that every roster push has to be  
>> acknowledged?  Doesn't this increase the transmissions required  
>> from a client?  (Note that the client cannot pipeline them all  
>> into the same TCP  packet, because of (1) - otherwise, it'd  
>> presumably compress well).
> 
> No.  Same as any roster push.  You just have to store the version   
> number, and your associated data model.

Newton's second law of iq stanzas states that to every <iq  
type='set|get'/>, there is an equal and opposite <iq  
type='result|error'/>, though, so surely each push will generate a  
transmission?

Using one of these trendy instant messaging things, Joe told me that  
nobody, apparently, sends type='result' anyway - is this true, folks,  
and does it matter? (I think it's a mistake to encourage this).

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at jabber.org
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade