[Standards] s2s and gracelessly broken streams

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Fri Mar 30 17:36:01 UTC 2007


On Thursday 29 March 2007 1:07 am, Philipp Hancke wrote:
> Justin Karneges wrote:
> > I'd propose, then, having 2 timeouts:
> >   1) time to try probing (e.g. 10* minutes)
> >   2) time to give up waiting for a reply, assume offline (e.g. 2* mins
> > later) * Feel free to replace with better numbers.
>
> Warning, heresy below:
> I dont like the usage of the word 'assume'. What about making the reply
> to a probe mandatory? Essentially I think it might be worthwile to
> replace <presence/> based probing on s2s with iq-based ones (c2s does
> not need to be changed for that).

Yes, but we also "assume" that the server will reply to probes on initial 
presence.  Today, when a client signs on, it starts with a blank slate 
(everyone is unavailable), and it relies on the server probes to bring in the 
real presence.  So yes, I'm making an assumption in my proposal here, but 
this same assumption drives the entire system we have today.

Changing the "SHOULD reply" to "MUST reply" in RFC 3921 5.1.3 is probably a 
separate argument than what we're discussing here.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list