On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:37:35 +0100 Pedro Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Oct 7, 2008, at 12:29 PM, Pavel Simerda wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 19:07:24 +0100 > > Pedro Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On Oct 6, 2008, at 5:27 PM, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > >> > >>> Ok, I can understand your suggestions now. However, you're missing > >>> one point: What advantage do we get by a resource that has no > >>> meaing? IMO, nothing. A static resource just makes it easier for > >>> everyone, IMO. Replacing the connection, etc. > >> > >> No it does not, because you don't want a connection replaced. you > >> want a controlled take-over of an old session. You want a new > >> connection to arrive and tell the server "Hey, I'm session-ID X and > >> I want to take over it". > > > > Hmm, you helped me to understand the case. Do we have a way to at > > least > > specify the old session-ID? > > XEP-0198, section 6, example 12. > (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0198.html#example-12 ) > > Best regards, Even though I read that one again, I missed the session IDs. Is there any chance this stream management XEP (that's far more than the original features) will become widely used by (almost) all implementations? Pavel -- Pavel Šimerda Freelancer v oblasti počítačových sítí, komunikace a bezpečnosti Web: http://www.pavlix.net/ Jabber & Mail: pavlix(at)pavlix.net OpenID: pavlix.net
