[Standards-JIG] Dead participants in MU-conf, JEP-0045

Heiner Wolf wolf at bluehands.de
Tue Dec 14 19:26:59 UTC 2004

>Yes, you are right, this is the fault of one or the other router. But
>this is a distributed service of heterogeneous components. Some of them
>fail, some may even do worse. MUC must not rely on the good behaviour
>all components. A chat might become unusable, because some servers are
>badly implemented. Thats what I am experiencing. I have rooms, with
>zombies. People avoid these rooms. I can not force my users to use only
>correctly implemented routers/delivery mechanisms. For users its "the
>Jabber chat" that has zombies. I am not happy with that, but it's the
>real world. MUC should and could protect itself. 

I wonder, what JEP authors and/or MUC implementors think about this

I propose to add a SHOULD to JEP-0045. How would this be done. Do I send
the text to the JEP author?  When is JEP-0045 going to be final? 

Dr. Klaus H. Wolf
bluehands GmbH & Co.mmunication KG
+49 (0721) 16108 75
Jabber enabled Virtual Presence on the Web: http://www.lluna.de/
Open Source Future History: http://www.galactic-developments.com/

More information about the Standards mailing list