On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 09:43, Thomas Kratz <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bernd, > > yes I am talking about c)
Then you can only send unavail to contacts, sending to the client too or even wait is pretty much pointless, isn't it? > I already thought about the problem, that I only have to do this on > connection breakdown, but I did not see how to make the distinction. Pls update from svn and look at the new signature of endSession() > I > do not even have enough knowledge to set up a proper test case :( I > only can test with my smack client by now. If you gave me some > directions where to look at I ll try and provide a test case. > > BTW I saw that I get the avaiable message twice when a user connects, > that doesn't hurt me, but I guess its not intended, is it ? Can you provide more details please... Who get's the avail twice? The client? His contacts? Both? Who becomes avail first, the client or his contacts? May I ask you to open a JIRA for this? Thanks! :-) > > Greetings from Hamburg > Thomas Cheers, Bernd > > > 2010/3/8 Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]>: >> Thomas Kratz wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I don't know if my question yesterday was concrete enough. >>> >>> I try to send an unavailable message when the connection breaks down >>> and I wonder if I can somehow wait for the message to go out. >> >> Wait a second. >> >> There are different cases: >> >> a. Client sends <pres unavail.../> and keeps connection alive >> b. Client sends <pres unavail.../> (maybe followed by a </stream:stream> >> and closes the socket >> c. Client dies, Routing is broken, Socket cannot transport packets >> successfully end-to-end and the server detects this, because the socket >> gets closed - this is without the client notifying the server of anything >> d. Server goes down and is in process of ending all sessions >> >> Up until now, I thought we were talking c., right? >> a. is (should be) already working >> b. is not fully working, but we would be working on the wrong end then >> d. must be handled completely different. >> >> So, what is/are your case(s)? >> >>> Because >>> afterwards the session gets CLOSED and an unbind happens, which now >>> makes my attempt to send the unavailable break. >> >>> Or is there a way to >>> send a Stanza synchronuosly? >> >> in MinaBackedSessionContext there is write(Stanza). This is a hack. So >> is everything attached to VYSPER-185. >> >> Bernd >> >> >> > > > > -- > http://www.buchmanager.com > http://thomaskratz.blogspot.com >
