[jdev] last presence confusion
stpeter at stpeter.im
Fri Jan 25 12:11:51 CST 2008
Maciek Niedzielski wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 12:23:38PM -0800, Justin Karneges wrote:
>> On Thursday 20 December 2007 2:52 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> 2. Else, if the contact has no available resources, the server MUST
>>> either (1) reply to the presence probe by sending to the user the
>>> full XML of the last presence stanza of type "unavailable"
>>> received by the server from the contact, or (2) not reply at all.
>>> So a nice server will return the last unavailable presence information
>>> (with a Delayed Delivery flag), thus obviating the need for a flood of
>>> jabber:iq:last requests.
>> How about emphasizing the first option as a SHOULD? This would hopefully
>> encourage new servers to always reply, while not causing existing servers to
>> become non-compliant.
> On the other hand, usually just 1/3 of my roster is online. So if server
> starts sending presence for all contacts, initial "presence flood" from
> the server increases 3 times.
So do I take that as an objection to the modified text in rfc3921bis?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the JDev