[Standards-JIG] Re: Council decision on "Stanza Acking" proposal

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Fri Mar 25 21:16:08 UTC 2005

On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 04:54:31PM +0200, Stephen Marquard wrote:

> It's hard to see how the problem can be called an "edge case" (with 
> increasing prevalence of wireless devices that go off the air without 
> notice, and notebooks that get hibernated).

IMHO, devices that cannot maintain long-lived TCP connections should use
a different stream binding (i.e., the HTTP binding defined in JEP-0124).
And it seems to me that before a notebook computer switches to hibernate 
mode, it should be able to inform applications of that fact, so that a
a Jabber client can end its session gracefully. Making modifications at 
the stream level in order to compensate for poorly written clients does 
not strike me as a good idea.

> The council decision also seems to be a reversal of the practice of 
> establishing working protocols and then standardising them through IETF. 
> If everyone had waited for RFC3920 before writing any code, Jabber 
> wouldn't exist today.

Actually, the true practice is working on some experimental code and
then standardizing it through the appropriate means (either a JEP or an
Internet-Draft). So feel free to experiment. :-)

Finally, I really would be curious to know how serious a "problem" this 
is, as shown by hard numbers and actual statistics. So far, all we have
is anecdotal evidence as far as I'm concerned.


More information about the Standards mailing list