tis 2008-06-10 klockan 11:38 -0600 skrev Peter Saint-Andre: > On 06/10/2008 11:43 AM, Marcus Lundblad wrote: > > I was just looking a bit at XEP-0047 (in-band bytestreams). > > > > In section 6 it says: > > > > Example 6. Acknowledging data using iq > > > > <iq from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/balcony' to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/orchard' > > type='result' id='ibb1'/> > > The sender need not wait for these acknowledgements before sending > > further stanzas. However, it is RECOMMENDED that the sender does wait in > > order to minimize possible rate-limiting penalties. > > > > Further the XEP states that if the server supports Advanced message > > processing, data should be sent using <message/> stanzas, rather than > > <iq/> > > > > However, when sending <message/> stanzas, is it possible to get an > > acknowlegment to know when to send the next data chunk without placing > > to much load on the server? > > You could use XEP-0184 for that, but if you really want acks then IMHO > it's best to use IQs.
I suppose it could also be possible to use a callback set to fire off by a timer in the case <message/> stanzas, to prevent it from flooding the server. That was my main thoughts, to avoid penalty from the server. I have some plans to implement IBB support in libpurple (Pidgin), mostly as a fallback solution for file transfers when socks5 fails (and later, maybe even after trying to negotiate a Jingle file transfer). What would be the advantage of using <message/> stanzas? (since it recommends using them when AMP is available...) //Marcus
