[Standards] XEP-0033 Extended Stanza addressing: Directed presence use case

Mickaël Rémond mremond at process-one.net
Wed Aug 5 14:17:40 UTC 2015


Hello Florian,

On 4 Aug 2015, at 22:45, Florian Schmaus wrote:

> On 04.08.2015 19:35, Mickaël Rémond wrote:
>> I hope it makes sense to you :)
>
> Yep. At first I was thinking that triggering the unavailable presence to
> the xep33 service could become an issue. But after looking again at
> xep33 examples and thinking a bit more about it, I'm more and more
> convinced that it will/could work. Mostly because from the user's server
> perspective the xep33 presence sent to the xep33 service is just an
> ordinary directed presence. And thus the unavailable presence will be
> send by the users server if the client goes offline (not matter if it's
> a clean termination of the c2s connection or an abrupt one).
>
> It really seems like a xep33 service needs to keep track of presence
> sessions established via xep33 broadcasted presences, similar to what
> servers are required to do as per rfc6121 § 4.6. If we find this to be
> true, then it should be stated in xep33.

Thanks for your feedback. I will prepare a PR for XEP-0033.

-- 
Mickaël Rémond



More information about the Standards mailing list