[Standards] XEP-0198 suggestion (Stream management)
mickael.remond at process-one.net
Sat Feb 28 14:10:18 UTC 2009
Dave Cridland wrote:
> Well, that's true, but you just encode in whatever else makes sense
> to relocate the session.
> We'd be using a node URI and session number tuple, probably.
What if you resume twice ?
You cannot implement session migration to the new node the user might be
connected to, because the this sm-id is not updated during the life of
I still think requiring the full JID is the best approach as it maps
with how to locate a session in the server when sending a message to a
client. No extra mechanism is required to locate a session to resume
than to locate it to send it a message. This is why I think this is much
My original point is that this full JID seems needed for performance /
scalability reason and we will need our implementation to require
that. This looks like a small detail but when you deal with hundreds of
thousands online users (and even more with millions), this is the kind
of decision that pay off.
More information about the Standards