Kevin Smith;1751 Wrote: > > I think you mean 'unreliable', rather than 'insecure'. There aren't > many network connections that're more secure than no network > connection :) >
Thanks. I still have to search for my words in English... Hum... now that I think about it, I still search for them in French too. Maybe I should just stop speaking! :-D This will be better anyway. ;-) > > XEP-0198 - Stanza Acknowledgements is what you want. > > /K] > Ok. I told you that I did not know well enough the XEPs. :p Anyway don't you think this would be better to improve client and server implementations rather than adding a new layer atop all the current one? XMPP is made to be exchanged on top of a reliable connection (most common and the one it has mostly been designed for being TCP!). In such context you already have aknowledgments about succeeded transfer or not. So a server already knows it has not been able to send a message (even though it was thinking the connection was fine before it tried to send data) so it should just deal the case: for instance, when there is offline storage, the message is stored for next connection. On its side a client knows when it has not been able to send a message to the server. If connection breaks, the message should be stored on client side (or else the user should be informed the message could not be sent). There really should be no need of another layer of aknowledgment, because you are only moving the problem one step above, on XMPP layer. But at the end, this will be the same basic cases that the server and client implementations will have to deal: tcp connections failure. I think we are adding new stanza cases for no reason and that the best method for doing this is rather a "technical best practice about implementation cases". I may be wrong of course because I don't know the matter well enough, so I will read your answers with great attention. :-) Jehan -- Jehan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jehan's Profile: http://www.jabberforum.org/member.php?userid=16911 View this thread: http://www.jabberforum.org/showthread.php?t=417
