Peter Millard wrote: > If we do this, it still requires routers to cache all of the presence > packets that pass thru it, and "do the right thing" if they don't get > another packet. It's these types of complications that make a protocol > a lot more resource intensive and time consuming to implement. ... > Perhaps the time we're spending on this discussion could go to > improving the jabberd 1.4.3 s2s process and we'd all be much happier > :) > > pgm.
So the presence cache would be the way to go then? And what would the best way be to detect a broken connection, especially with TCP's 20 minute wait? Would periodic updates to the cache need to be done too since s2s isn't always connected? Should they be scheduled w/ the <x/> stanza I suggested? This could be hidden from the clients by letting the servers add/remove it. Are there any questions that I missed or suggestions that should be heard so the Right implementation gets written? Regards, Nolan -- http://www.semanticgap.com/people/sneakin/ _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
