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

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Aug 27 16:03:26 UTC 2007

Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 24-08-2007, Pt o godzinie 11:32 +0200, Jérôme Carretero napisał(a):
>>  - I'm having with my co-workers a MUC for internal conversation, and
>> a shared JID for external contact (like contact at myorg.net ) ; there is
>> contact at myorg.net/joe (3), contact at myorg.net/jeff (3),
>> contact at myorg.net/otherguy (3) ... and I want that people talking to
>> contact at myorg.net for an emergency can be served instantly.
>> So the guy PMs contact at myorg.net, and everybody receives it.

We have a spec for this:


Let's not clutter up the general case with this kind of functionality.


> Yes. But let's keep your example on.

Your example is misleading. I'll add some XML to show why.

> Sally: Help.  [multicasted to all 3]

<message from='sally at example.org/foo'
         to='contact at example.com'

NOTE: This is directed to the bare JID because Sally doesn't have any
context about which resource will reply. In this case, yes it is
encouraged to send to the bare JID, not the full JID. And yes, the
message is multicasted to all 3 of the contact team's resources.

> Joe: Please describe your problem.  [to Sally]

<message from='contact at example.com/joe'
         to='sally at example.org/foo'
  <body>Please describe your problem.</body>

NOTE: Joe sends from his full JID (stamped by his server) to Sally's
full JID (previously stamped by Sally's server). Now they are in a "chat
session" and will send to/from full JIDs the whole time. So this message
is NOT multicasted to all 3 of Sally's resources -- it is delivered ONLY
to her "foo" resource.

> Sally: I cannot do XXX.  [multicasted to all 3]

<message from='sally at example.org/foo'
         to='contact at example.com/joe'
  <body>I cannot do XXX.</body>

NOTE: This is NOT multicasted to all 3 of the contact team's resources,
instead it is delivered ONLY to Joe (the "joe" resource).

> Jeff: Hi Sally. Please describe your problem.  [to Sally]
> Sally: I already did it.  [multicasted to all 3]
> Joe: Oh fine. So we're done here?  [to Sally]
> Jeff: When?  [to Sally]
> Sally: ??? confused

As described above, there is no confusion.

> The chatwindow full resource binding was discouraged and clients are
> expected to send messages to bare JIDs now. So the described situation
> is going to happen.
> The helpdesk protocol is invented and implemented with servers and
> should be used instead of this multicast idea.
> And for normal usage, the best practices XEP should be created.

It never hurts to describe best practices...


Peter Saint-Andre

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070827/88d26cf9/attachment.bin>

More information about the Standards mailing list