[Standards] [jdev] Do Not Disturb, Directed Presence, etc
dave at cridland.net
Tue Jul 1 10:55:19 UTC 2008
On Tue Jul 1 11:38:33 2008, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Pedro Melo <melo at co.sapo.pt> wrote:
> > Just because you, remko, and me don't like auto-replies, doesn't
> > them go away, that's my fear.
> I propose the following text for -bis, then:
> Autoreplies are bad. If you want to use one, go away.
> Would that solve the problem? :D
Actually, RFC 3921 itself has the right gunk for marking the
auto-responders, we just need to remind people that this gunk exists,
and how to use it. This is Best Practise territory, not new protocol.
And yes, this Best Practise document could also say "Don't send
spurious auto-responses to a bot, silly."
> As to the proposed problem with message loops, have we ever seen
> It sounds like clients with autoreplies will end up getting bug
> reports and having to fix this :)
Well, yes, I've not seen it, nor heard of it happening, but given the
steady increase in services run over XMPP with an IM-like interface,
I suspect that we could end up seeing them more. Certainly the
accidental posting of auto-responders seems likely, and while not as
scary as a messaging loop, it's certainly worth avoiding.
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
More information about the Standards