[Standards] Comment to rfc3921 pt 11.1 : handling of messages to ressources with identical priorities

cJ zougloub at gmail.com
Tue Aug 21 17:40:56 UTC 2007


Priority ties happen for example when people get "disconnected by peer" aka ISP provider ; you connect, and you can see your ghost.
Unfortunately as he has the same resource as you he's discarded (or it seems).
In that case, sending a message to both resources means only one gets it.

They also appear when wanted explicitely.
One could expect that getting the message on the destination boxes is wanted.
In my case, it is.

Apart the "sell 50 shares" reason (which I find not quite good since the messages have timestamps on them) I don't see what's opposing this practice.
Anyway, if the "sell 50 shares" effect is a problem, we could do something : also broadcast the someone-using-the-multiple-jid messages to the other resources with same highest priority.
Maybe it's too complicated... 

My 2 shares...

-- 
cJ



On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:03:38 -0600
Joe Hildebrand <hildjj at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Aug 21, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> 
> > Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> >> I often find that the people that want what the SIP folks call  
> >> "forking"
> >> are either using a client that doesn't set priority to 0 on auto- 
> >> away,
> >
> > That sounds like a best practice to document somewhere. :)
> 
> JD's presence priority stuff was a good start.  Perhaps it needs to  
> be a XEP.
> 
> >> are running multiple resources and haven't configured their  
> >> priorities
> >> in any interesting way, or have a server that doesn't make a good  
> >> guess
> >> on priority ties.
> >
> > I'm curious: how frequent are priority ties anyway?
> 
> First: how frequent are multiple resources today?  I bet that it gets  
> a little more frequent in the future, but not as frequent as we  
> thought before we had PEP.
> 



More information about the Standards mailing list