[Standards] Connected vs available resource

Ivan Vučica ivan at vucica.net
Mon Jun 3 20:29:33 UTC 2019


RFC 6121 makes a distinction between a connected and available
resource. Connected resource appears to be the one that's been through
a <bind/>, and an available resource seems to be the one that has had
an initial <presence/> sent -- that is, there is a 'presence session'

RFC 6120 doesn't proscribe that a presence session is required for
message delivery.

RFC 6121 proscribes that a message must be delivered to a connected
fulljid regardless; in case of a barejid, it proscribes behavior for
available resources, but feels curiously off-hand when it comes to
connected resources.

1) Does a connected resource which is not an available resource have a
priority that's 'nonnegative'? Technically there is no presence
session, but its priority could be considered 0.
2) Should it really be an implementation detail whether a connected
resource receives messages towards a barejid? Can it be proscribed
that a connected resource (the one that was bound) is sufficient for a
router to deliver a message toward a barejid, and to treat connected,
non-available resources as if they have priority 0?
3) How should XEP-0280 message carbons behave if a resource is
connected, but not available -- i.e. there is no 'presence session'

My opinion:

Being visible to presence subscribers as online should not be a
prerequisite for receiving e.g. pubsub updates or even IM messages
sent to a barejid.

More information about the Standards mailing list