On 12/30/09 8:47 AM, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: > > Ian should really write up some document describing the way 124 is > supposed to work, I have seen it confusing quite a lot of people.
Ian disappeared quite a while ago. > 124 requires that when client wants to send a request, it should be > able to as soon as possible : since the previous request from client > would typically be blocked at CM if there is no response to be > returned. Correct. > This means that : a) Client uses 'another' connection to talk to CM. > In this case, CM will immediately respond back on the previous > connection and 'block' on the new connection (for returning responses > with minimum delay when server needs to send async messages back). Yes, that is the pattern we assume. > b) > If client uses same socket (for whatever reason : pipelining POST's > is really weird behavior IIRC), then CM should detect availability of > a new request from client and send a response back for the previous > request. > > (b) is not required since most, if not all, impl's do not pipeline > post requests. Mridul, I agree with your later message that pipelining POSTs should be strongly discouraged, as it already is in RFC 2616. Do we need some text about that in XEP-0124? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
