[Standards] Move Carbons to Last Call ("Proposed")
dave at cridland.net
Wed Aug 12 10:41:58 UTC 2015
On 12 August 2015 at 11:20, Holger Weiß <holger at zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> * Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> [2015-08-12 10:54]:
> > For MUC, I'll summarize our conversation online as servers already have
> > track directed presence to chatrooms; it should be relatively low-cost to
> > check responses and mark those as chatrooms as needed, and then perform a
> > lookup for Carbons purposes.
> That way you can make sure a client won't receive carbons of PMs of MUCs
> he's not joined to. A remaining problem is that multiple clients might
> be joined using the same nick name, in which case you don't know whether
> the MUC service delivers PMs to all or just one of them.น
That's a good point.
To expand, we could have the servers send Carbons to nick-shares, in fact,
but the MUC server might be sending duplicates (and three devices would
then yield one PM and two Carbons each).
I don't think we can solve this without specifying MUC nick-sharing
properly, which probably opens many cans of worms.
As Kev says, this is just another problem that needs solving in MUC2.
> น Cf. http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2015-May/029825.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards