[Standards] negative presence

Joe Hildebrand hildjj at gmail.com
Sat Mar 24 04:59:07 UTC 2007


On Mar 23, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wonder if anybody has an idea about support for negative  
> presences in the servers all around. I´ve tested with wildfire and  
> ejabberd. Wildfire forwards messages without a resource to a  
> negative priority resource (I'm reporting this as a bug), ejabberd  
> does not. Anybody tested with other servers?

XCP does the right thing.  Note: an interesting edge case is sending  
pri-1 on login to an account with pending offline messages.

>
> I'm also worried about clients. What would be the proper way for a  
> client to deal with a negative presence? right now I think that he  
> should not show the person as online, nor should he allow any chat  
> messages to be sent directly to the resource. After all, I  
> interpret negative priority as a "no chat" indication, right?

It's not so much "no chat" as "presence only", I think.  How useful  
that feature is in a PEP-deployed world, we'll have to find out.

> The reason I'm asking is that we are starting to test agents, small  
> task-oriented applications that work over XMPP to accomplish a  
> simple task. They use the same JID as my main account. Think about  
> an assistant, that receives meeting requests, checks you calendar  
> and accepts or denies the request based on user defined criteria.  
> Or a content management system that synchronizes all his content to  
> all the elements of the team via XMPP.

As I said in another response, just don't send presence at all for  
some of these use cases.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand





More information about the Standards mailing list