[Standards-JIG] proto-JEP: Smart Presence Distribution

Richard Dobson richard at dobson-i.net
Wed May 17 17:51:37 UTC 2006

> I thought a quickstart to happiness with a seriously simple JEP
> already helps us a lot, considering that these presence fan outs
> are the highest load on the XMPP network from what I saw on some
> statistics. Obviously excessive users of presence-out wouldn't be
> exactly useful to the process, but I suppose a majority of users
> never makes use of that function.

What makes you suppose that? We usually prefer to look longer term when 
developing protocols here, and prefer to develop solutions that will not 
break or are against the existing protocol, we prefer to extend.

> | Something like JEP-0033 but where instead of including all the addresses 
> | in each stanza you negotiate a distribution list with the remote server 
> | and just send the stanza to that distribution list that in turn 
> | distributes the stanza to all the people i.e.
> I'd rather see presence-out settings communicated to the other side
> so the receiving server takes care of not forwarding the information.
> Just like it is done with presence subscription exchange.

What I suggested effectively gives you this, it allows the sending 
server to tell the receiving server exactly who should receive 
something, rather than the receiving server having to guess and quite 
possibly send it to someone who it shouldnt go to, either because it 
might have been blocked, or because the roster states are simply out of 
sync (or quite possibly for other reasons).

> And now let me go a little beyond, just philosophically...
> Generally the presence-out filter idea isn't really convincing me.
 > I'm more advocate for the sincerity option: If you're not going to
 > share your presence with me, be honest about it and send me a real
 > unsubscription.

Just because its not convincing to you doesnt mean its not convincing 
for the rest of us.

> Also I have the impression when somebody puts you in <presence-out/>
> you no longer see him on the roster, thus you forget that you still
> keep sending him presence every day. How unfair is that? One person
> decides to retain privacy and gets an even better chance to peek on
> the habits of the other? Correct me if I got something wrong, but I
> would want to know if the other side has put me on presence-out.

Well thats not up to you, the whole idea of privacy is that you can do 
things that the other person does not know about, like blocking them.


More information about the Standards mailing list