On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Justin Karneges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My plan has always been to use XEP-198 for this. If your server wants you to > back off, it'll just not ack back to you over the c2s (or s2s) link. > Similarly, a mobile client that is dying would just not ack back to the > server. This way you can do flow control per-hop rather than end-to-end. Sorry fo the delay. Yep, agree xep-198 solves the saturation problem of the I/O buffers of clients, which, I think, is most painful for usability. Imho xep-47 should recommend acks with a SHOULD. It just remains open the case when the receiving server has more restrictive policies about IBB than the sending one or the receiving client is too slow, forcing to buffer a large number of packets. -- Fabio Forno, Ph.D. Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com jabber id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
