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

Alexander Gnauck gnauck at ag-software.de
Sun Oct 29 14:30:41 UTC 2006

Jean-Louis Seguineau wrote:
> Restoring connectivity is a separate concern. As Robert pointed out, this is
> one area where SIP is better than XMPP. SIP does not assume connectivity, as
> it can use UDP as a transport. As a result it provides well defined and
> documented timers for each network operation. As an example, if a message
> cannot be delivered to destination for 69 sec, an error message is returned
> to the sender. SIP even defines the time interval between each retry in
> order to limit the network load, as the retries are atomic at each message
> level. 

i agree with Jean-Louis. I also brought this up in the "message 
importance" thread:

We could use AMP for that, but i think it would be better to implement 
this on the session level and not add the routing rules with each message.

We could have.
1) fixed routing rules defined on the server.
2) per user/account routing rules defined by a user and stored on the 
3) per stanza routing rules with AMP.


More information about the Standards mailing list