[Standards-JIG] RFC 3921 Better User Presence Experience(Implementation Detail)

JD Conley jd.conley at coversant.net
Thu Oct 26 18:45:16 UTC 2006


> This has a lot of implications, many of them not obvious. First, in
> highly distributed servers, the S2S mechanism is a separate component
> from the session management component. This allows the session
> manager to not have to concern itself with managing connections. For
> this to work, the S2S mechanism would have to be made a little
> smarter, and the session management a little bit more aware of the
> connection-oriented nature of the connection.

The session manager would be acting on stanza errors it received from
the s2s connection component. S2S components should be smart enough to
do some retrying before sending back errors, and the type of connection
doesn't really matter.

> This also would require a change to the XMPP RFC's; which, according
> to XEP-0134, is "sacred". That doesn't mean that this isn't a real
> problem though.

We need to keep the simple client design philosophy alive. The server
could do it today without changing any specs by sending out a probe
storm to the destination domain. I was just suggesting an overload on
probe to make it only a presence receive storm.

> If a server quite simply cannot contact another server "all of the
> sudden" for an extended period of time, then it seems reasonable that
> the server should communicate that to the users in some way.

Exactly.

-JD 




More information about the Standards mailing list