On 2/10/06, Michal Vaner (Vorner) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dne pátek 10 únor 2006 13:23 Vinod Panicker napsal(a): > > Hi, > > > > According to RFC 3921, section 5.1.3, point 4 - > > > > "Else, if the contact has at least one available resource, the > > server MUST reply to the presence probe by sending to the user > > the full XML of the last presence stanza with no 'to' attribute > > received by the server from each of the contact's available > > resources (again, subject to privacy lists in force for each > > session)." > > > > Taking this into consideration, lets look at the following scenario - > > > > - contact and user are in each other's rosters, with a subscription type of > > both - contact sets presence as busy > > - contact sends a directed presence to user, type away > > - user's server sends a presence probe to contact > > - contact's server returns the last presence stanza received with no > > 'to' attribute - busy > > > > I think that the contact's server should send the last directed > > presence received for the user, if applicable. > > > > WDYAT? > > > > Regards, > > Vinod. > > Hello, > if I got it right, the probe should be sent by the server only in the ocassion > that the user just connected and the server does not yet know the foreign > user's state. If the foreign user sent a direct presence, the user was not > connected ad it got dropped. Therefore I think the situation you describe > will not happen.But I can be easilly mistaken.
Typically yes, but not necessarily. A server might send a presence probe on behalf of the user to find out if the contact is still around. Even in the case you described, a Directed presence is valid for a "session". So replies to presence probes should be of the directed presence, and not the global presence. Regards, Vinod.
