[Council] meeting agenda, 2006-03-23

Ian Paterson ian.paterson at clientside.co.uk
Thu Mar 23 21:30:16 CST 2006

> I'm wondering if Ian could 
> send out a link to standards-jig list thread which provides the 
> background on this multi-stream stuff.


The latest draft in the CVS is here:


> Upon first glance, it seems these 
> changes are fine with previous versions
> of the JEP and should not pose any 
> compatibility issues.

That is right. There are no issues *whatsoever* for existing
implementations. Jabber Inc. can completely ignore the new features.
Implementation is not required for compliance.

> What I don't understand is the problem 
> that this 
> new stuff is trying to solve. With -124, the client can
> maintain multiple connections to the CM, so why do we
> need multiple streams?

To quote from the JEP in the CVS:

"some runtime environments constrain the number of simultaneous HTTP
requests a client may make"

Believe me, this is a real problem for Web clients.

> also seems that multiple streams just complicate matters with the 
> in-order delivery requirements of RFC 3920 as well. IE, one 
> stream can receive stanzas before the other stream and breaking
> in-order delivery.

For each individual stream stanzas will still be delivered in-order.

Isn't that sufficient to comply with RFC 3920?

- Ian

More information about the Council mailing list