[Standards] Resource conflict handling

Glenn Maynard glenn at zewt.org
Mon Jun 13 09:08:58 UTC 2011


On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:

> On Fri Jun 10 18:48:01 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>
>> This won't work properly if the existing client is a paused BOSH session,
>> which may not unpause the session to reply for arbitrary lengths of time.
>>
> So it times out. No problem. Still works properly, everything's happy and
> jolly.
>

BOSH sessions may have pause sessions hours long.  Taking an hour to time
out isn't jolly, it's broken.

Even the more common case of pauses on the order of minutes would be a
clearly unacceptable delay.  I don't think designing around expected
timeouts is a good approach.

It's not one client involved, but two, and any time the right behaviour is
> dependent on more than one entity doing things right, disaster lurks in the
> wings.
>
> If one client does it right, and another does it wrong, there's some nasty
> failure cases.


How is a buggy client ever going to accidentally conflict with a SHA-1 based
resourcepart?  (Or even something much shorter--you don't need 160 bits to
prevent that.)  The point is using resourceparts designed to prevent these
accidental conflicts.

-- 
Glenn Maynard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20110613/68f4b42c/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list