[Standards-JIG] Directed presence -> subscribed -> unsubscribed -> ???

Tomasz Sterna tomasz.sterna at gmail.com
Tue Nov 29 08:11:31 UTC 2005

2005/11/26, Gaston Dombiak <gaston at jivesoftware.com>:
> In the rfc3921 section 5.1.4 Directed Presence bullet 2 it clearly states
> that if a user sends a directed presence to a user that is not in his roster
> (or sub=NONE or sub=TO) then the server should take not of the directed
> presence. So if the user never sends a directed unavailable presence then
> the server should do it on behalf of the user.

I personally think, that the whole directed-presence support on server
is unnecessary burden and it should be discouraged.

When you do hack your presence state sending directed presences, you
are creating an unpredictable presence-space over you. There is no
reliable way of determining which contacts see what presence of yours.
Even if you do track directed-presence client-level, what about other resources?

I do agree, that directed-presence might be a usefull hack,
but I don't think we should encourage using it,
by supportinging any more sophisticated server support for it, than
"just don't process directed presence, and forward it as-is".


More information about the Standards mailing list