[Standards] reliable messaging
dave at cridland.net
Wed Jun 17 14:20:43 UTC 2009
On Wed Jun 17 15:13:23 2009, Brian Cully wrote:
> If one were to go so far as to cryptographically sign the message
> receipt in some way (especially with a signature based on the
> contents of the original message) you've gone another step to show
> that the client got the message and processed it in some way. I'd
> venture to say that for most scenarios that kind of receipt would
> be more than good enough.
Any kind of positive receipt, with no sign of error, is, I think, at
least good enough to say "there is nothing more I can do" as a sender.
I think that includes receipt of a response to a ping sent
immediately after the message, if nothing more atomic is available.
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