2010/3/9 Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]>: > 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?
Yes that what I am trying to do. But I had trouble because of the unbind makes it impossible to send to stanza to the contacts, because the resource of the unhappy broken down client got removed. > >> 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() > Thats great, I think that will make it. >> 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! :-) I'll open a JIRA and attach my client code. > >> >> 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 >> > -- http://www.buchmanager.com http://thomaskratz.blogspot.com
