On Wed, 29 May 2002, Nathan Sharp wrote: > Please take note, what I'm suggesting is a configurable option, not a > required protocol change.
I agree the issue needs to be resolved. I find your current solution simple. Any server admin that does not want that extra traffic can disable it (BTW any simple way to configure the "ping" interval?). > The biggest argument I've heard so far is that ping/pongs would take too > much bandwidth. Well, in case anyone has a better idea he is free to contribute. For the time being your solution seems okay especially for it does not need protocol or client changes. > If your end users would prefer very slightly less bandwidth used yet > LOST MESSAGES AND FAULTY PRESENCE info, Even with your patch messages may get lost. One should implement sending of an error message or offline storage of the message that failed (if possible). Regards _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
