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

JD Conley jd.conley at coversant.net
Fri Oct 27 19:00:36 UTC 2006


> There are (at least) two separate aspects in the problem:
> 
> 1/ report back an abnormal state to the client.
> 2/ take action to restore connectivity.

Precisely.

> 
> As to reporting back the abnormal state, using an "error" of some sort
> is
> IMO the way to go, as it allow for a clear differentiation between the
> presence and the connectivity state (see Mathias post).

I agree as well.

> The important point would be to clearly define the
> various
> timeouts, and the associated error states.

Yes! I know we all implement this stuff. Reliability of the network
would go up quite a bit if the actions to perform and timeouts to wait
were well defined.

> My $0.02, but I believe solving this would greatly improve the
> robustness of
> S2S connectivity, which is a big strength of XMPP.

Are you reading my mind? :)

So, who's up for drafting some of this up?

-JD



More information about the Standards mailing list