[Standards] rfc3921bis: self-presence

Mridul Mridul.Muralidharan at Sun.COM
Sat Sep 1 10:07:38 UTC 2007



Curtis King wrote:
> 
> On Aug 29, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
> 
>>
>> 3921.Section 5.1.1 - "In addition, the user's server MUST broadcast
>> initial presence from the user's new available resource to any of the
>> user's existing available resources (if any)."
>> I think this is pretty clear in stating that presence is to be sent to
>> existing resources 'if any' (and not the 'new available resource').
> 
> It's not clear because what does "existing available resources" mean?

Explicit use of 'new available resource' and 'if any' should clarify that ?
If someone wants to mis-read it on purpose, sure that is possible
through out the rfc's - it is after all an engineering document !
imo, it is not ambiguous - nor is it bugprone or problematic.
So I hope the change being affected is not in the name of clarifying it
- iirc, this is the expected behavior from all servers today, ditto for
clients (who use this).

- Mridul

> You can read it either way because the new available resource is a
> existing available resource ;-) It needs to-be clarified which 3921bis
> does. These type of language issues happen with any successful RFC and
> is why there have been bis releases of SMTP, IMAP, POP3, etc......
> Implementers will just sort out any fallout from the changes or the
> product will disappear because users will choose the working product ;-)
> I have found after a bis release interoperability does improve.
> 
> ck
> 



More information about the Standards mailing list