Richard Dobson wrote: > >> Very funny. :P >> >> We use messages there in part because using IQs would require knowing >> the full JID (and stock pubsub services do not know that). >> >> But that's neither here nor there. The question is whether: >> >> (1) acking an occasional roster push from the server to the client >> (where BTW the server *does* know your full JID) is a serious problem >> that we need to solve because it wastes large amounts of bandwidth >> >> or >> >> (2) sending roster pushes via <message/> is a pretty optimization that >> is more elegant than what we developed in 1999, but it fundamentally >> unnecessary >> >> I think (2) obtains. Therefore I think it's just fine to keep IQs for >> roster pushes. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. >> >> Peter >> > > Also surely if you are doing roster sequencing I would have thought it > would be important for the server to know if you have received the push > or not in order to keep things in sync correctly? So the ack is actually > quite useful.
I'm not sure if the server absolutely needs to know if you have received the push because in general I think the server will just send out all the pushes without blocking on receipt of an ack. However, I can imagine cases where the server might want to receive the acks for some kind of tracking purpose. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
