[Standards-JIG] File transfer improvements

Jean-Louis Seguineau jean-louis.seguineau at laposte.net
Mon Jul 3 18:20:04 UTC 2006

Hi Nolan,

In general, I agree XMPP would benefit from a better specification of how
the 'offline' cases have to be handled. After all why not make sure we
"presence enable" every XMPP service...
In the file transfer case, the associated JEPs only address what is
happening when a recipient (p2p or mediated) is available. And in most cases
people have been using this protocol in a very "interactive" way, where they
either did not tried to transfer files to offline recipients, or could not
do it because their client would not let them do it.

You are right in saying there are use cases requiring the capability to
leave a file or other payload for a recipient that is either "offline" or in
a certain presence state. 
Taking your reference to Jingle, the extension provides a form of redirect
for session requests that would be appropriate in the case of redirecting to
a voice mail. So, in effect the protocol allow for the voice mail case
(voice mail being just an alternative Jingle recipient). 

In effect what are missing are the services that would handle the
redirections in case a user is "offline", "dnd" or whatever. It may be
beneficial to document recommendations describing how these services could
be discovered and what features set they could provide. We could imagine for
example that a Jingle voice mail service would allow an end user to set
different availability profiles and that the server could use these profiles
to make decisions as to where to redirect a Jingle request. A similar
approach could be applied to file transfer.

In the end, though, it would require different XMPP servers. Today's
implementations do not go beyond offline messages (I am not talking MUC or
PubSub which describe how presence is used in rendering their service). But
we certainly have to take these requirements for "offline" or presence
related file transfer and multimedia handling into consideration in the
related JEPs. 


-----Original Message-----

Message: 7
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 00:43:15 -0500
From: Nolan Eakins <sneakin at semanticgap.com>
Subject: Re: [Standards-JIG] File transfer improvements
To: Jabber protocol discussion list <standards-jig at jabber.org>
Message-ID: <44A8AE73.8080104 at semanticgap.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hash: SHA1

Magnus Henoch wrote:
> I've written about improvement proposals to file transfer JEPs in the
> wiki.  If you have anything to add, please do; in particular, the
> lists of clients implementing the proposals are probably incomplete.
> http://wiki.jabber.org/index.php/SOCKS5_Bytestreams_%28JEP-0065%29
> http://wiki.jabber.org/index.php/Stream_Initiation_%28JEP-0095%29

I haven't got around to writing anything, but we need to be able to send
files to people who are offline. This would allow actual attachments and
inline images in offline messages where the sender is offline too.

The offline case also needs to be handled by Jingle too. There's
currently no way to leave any kind of voice message, whether online or

Sadly, one of Jabber's best features is gradually being forgotten as we
move forward.

- - Nolan

More information about the Standards mailing list