[Standards] s2s and gracelessly broken streams
justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Fri Mar 30 17:22:34 UTC 2007
On Friday 30 March 2007 10:04 am, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Bruce Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Justin Karneges wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 27 March 2007 10:09 pm, Philipp Hancke wrote:
> >>> Justin Karneges wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>> The best solution, as far as I can tell, would be for the server to
> >>>> perform presence probes on a periodic basis, rather than only on
> >>>> client
> >>> The problem with that is that replies to the probe are optional. So If
> >>> the remote contact is assumed to be online and the remote server
> >>> chooses not to reply to probes if the contact is offline you have a
> >>> problem.
> >> Right. However, I think for this procedure we'd only want to probe
> >> against
> >> servers that we are no longer connected to, and only after some
> >> timeout. If
> > Seems to me that it would make more sense to periodically probe against
> > the remote server itself, rather than each contact at the remote server.
> > Is this possible?
> Sure, servers could share presence information, though that's not done
It may also be enough for the "probe" in this sense to simply be s2s
connectivity establishment, and not an actual presence probe.
The full probe would be more reliable though. I imagine that if the remote
contact changes presence (particularly to unavailable), and there is a lapse
in connectivity between your server and the remote server, then you might not
ever receive this presence notification.
More information about the Standards