[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Roster Versioning
stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Mar 17 17:26:02 UTC 2008
Richard Dobson wrote:
>> Very funny. :P
>> We use messages there in part because using IQs would require knowing
>> the full JID (and stock pubsub services do not know that).
>> But that's neither here nor there. The question is whether:
>> (1) acking an occasional roster push from the server to the client
>> (where BTW the server *does* know your full JID) is a serious problem
>> that we need to solve because it wastes large amounts of bandwidth
>> (2) sending roster pushes via <message/> is a pretty optimization that
>> is more elegant than what we developed in 1999, but it fundamentally
>> I think (2) obtains. Therefore I think it's just fine to keep IQs for
>> roster pushes. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> Also surely if you are doing roster sequencing I would have thought it
> would be important for the server to know if you have received the push
> or not in order to keep things in sync correctly? So the ack is actually
> quite useful.
I'm not sure if the server absolutely needs to know if you have received
the push because in general I think the server will just send out all
the pushes without blocking on receipt of an ack. However, I can imagine
cases where the server might want to receive the acks for some kind of
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards