[standards-jig] NEW: Message Delivery Semantics (JEP-0079)

David Waite mass at akuma.org
Thu Apr 17 00:55:03 UTC 2003


A few brief comments:

- The resource is defined in the XMPP spec as being opaque - I should 
not depend on a prefix/suffix actually meaning anything, or structured 
in any style. (For an example in terms of another protocol: I shouldn't 
assume http://example.com/cgi-bin/ refers to the parent document of 
http://example.com/cgi-bin/form.pl)

- Section 3 (Implementation Notes) is very odd; a client cannot perform 
any of the routing semantics, and the expiry semantics are not defined 
in application terms/client UI terms. Does it exire if not delivered by 
X time or if not displayed/processed by X time?

- Do you see additional rules being defined later? Perhaps the rules 
supported should be reported in a disco query response? A client would 
need to do a disco query of the remote server before requesting any of 
these delivery semantics anyways.

- Would a client ever want to request certain rules be used when 
responding to a message, or within a thread?

- Scoping larger than a single message (such as a whole thread) opens a 
whole can of worms. Does a by-thread scope apply to all resources or 
just the current one? How does the server prevent a user from doing a 
DoS by adding a few million thread IDs and eating up all memory? When 
does the thread scope end (when the local user goes offline? when the 
remote user goes offline?)  I'm not saying whether the bandwidth it 
would save is worth the the complexity in the proposal and 
implementations or not, just that it needs to be taken into account :-)

-David Waite

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>Matthew Miller has submitted a JEP for message delivery semantics. This
>JEP addresses the recent discussions on this list. You can find it here:
>
>http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0079.html
>
>Enjoy!
>
>Peter
>
>  
>




More information about the Standards mailing list