[Standards-JIG] Re: MUC presence issues

JD Conley jd.conley at coversant.net
Sat Oct 7 16:40:24 UTC 2006


> > And, do you want to have them on the c2s level, or on the MUC level?
> On
> > the MUC level, it would mean every component will soon have its own
> > keep-alive mechanism, if on c2s level, if the server 'just
> disappears',
> > you have the same problem, the user stays there.
> 
> the solution JD proposed works on c2s level. But this means that the
> server would have to take care about all presences to external
> components with the user session.
> I like both ideas, Ian's and JD's.

Servers already have to track all presences. When it receives an
unavailable it has to broadcast it to all the places the user sent
directed presence. If some servers aren't doing this then I can
definitely see why you guys see a lot of ghosted users. :) The only time
I really notice it is in the s2s case when a server goes down.

-JD



More information about the Standards mailing list