[Standards-JIG] Re: [jdev] XMPP Ping method?

Mridul Mridul.Muralidharan at Sun.COM
Thu Nov 2 12:49:52 UTC 2006


  If the intention is to keep the connection alive , whitespace pings
are great.
Is the intention is to detect if the connection is alive - whitespace
pings suffice to some extent.
Where they fail is the fact that you are relying on tcp timeouts
configured on the server box (which will be in order of 10's of mins).

Alternatively , we could mandate that if server sends a ping , client
MUST respond within some window of time : the timeout could be negotiated.
Failing to respond will be treated as connection loss and stream will be
If something of this sort is _not_ present , then whitespace will
continue to suffice instead of more complex alternatives.

We have always been sending whitespace pings to clients and other servers.
Similarly , if the client is connected through a proxy or other
intermediary which could drop connection through inactivity - the client
would send pings to the server (at configurable timeouts) too.

For reliable delivery - you could always look at end to end acknowledgment.


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Kevin Smith wrote:
>> Cross-posting to sjig:
>> On 1 Nov 2006, at 16:45, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> Scott Robinson wrote:
>>>> What is the proper method of performing a ping across a client XMPP
>>>> connection. That is, from a sever's perspective, if a client
>>>> mysteriously and unexpectedly drops off the Internet, it won't know it
>>>> until the TCP connection times out.
>>> Most servers use "whitespace pings". It would be good for us to document
>>> that method in an XMPP extension.
>> Perhaps we could also revisit the ping/ack (J|X)EP, as the whitespace
>> ping doesn't really address the issue as we might desire?
> I mentioned that in a recent Council meeting or mailing list post. Yes I
> think it's appropriate to publish that proposal as a XEP now.
> Peter

More information about the Standards mailing list