[Standards-JIG] Re: WHACK

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Sun Apr 30 14:25:18 UTC 2006


On 30 Apr 2006, at 13:32, Matthew Wild wrote:
> All this adds great complexity, compared to easy-to-implement,  
> bandwidth-saving whacks. I also think that methods of 'quick  
> reconnection' should be covered elsewhere, not by the  
> implementation of acks themselves.

Unfortunately, as we've previously discussed, whacks aren't viable.  
JEP-ACK is, however, semantically identical, very little bandwidth,  
and feasible. Low complexity, low bandwidth, non-compatibility breaking.

/K
-- 
Kevin Smith
Psi Jabber client maintainer (http://psi-im.org/)
Postgraduate Research Student, Computer Science, University Of Exeter





More information about the Standards mailing list