On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:40:28 +0100 Pedro Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Oct 7, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Pavel Simerda wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 11:39:11 +0100 > > Pedro Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On Oct 5, 2008, at 1:48 AM, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > >> > >>> "Matthew Wild" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> If they type it manually then they know what they are doing, and > >>>> when they come to type the stanza for resource binding, they will > >>>> read the RFC and see that it recommends not specifying a > >>>> resource :) > >>> > >>> Which is IMO a painfully bad idea for users with instable > >>> connections. They will have thousands of resources online after a > >>> short while and you don't know which to msg. Very, very bad idea, > >>> IMO. Makes it totally > >>> unusable with an unstable conenction. You *WANT* a static resource > >>> then, so you can replace the old, dead connection. > >> > >> I would recommend those clients to use BOSH and its native session > >> resume capabilities. > > > > I would recommend not to break the TCP way only to use a bunch of > > layers. Too many layers (in protocol, session layers, etc) add > > (usually > > unnecessary) complexity. > > Sure, but the scenario was unstable networks. On those networks, you > need a strong session-level reconnect protocol, and right now, XMPP > over http BOSH has that, and XMPP over TCP doesn't. > > > >> The users will be a lot happier. > >> > >> On a perfect world you would be able to use the same session-resume > >> capabilities on TCP. Maybe someday you will. > > > > That would be much better. But still it doesn't solve the > > "disconnect without reconnect" case (xep-198 mostly does). > > "disconnect without reconnect"? you mean when a client looses the > connection and doesn't reconnect in the allowed time? Yep, that's it. Just curious why minutes was chosen while seconds tend to be the basic unit anywhere there's no need for finer granularity... but that's just a detail. There won't be any way to change this from a client? > It would trigger the longest allowable time period for session > resumption timeout. Btw, it seems xep-198 is not clear enough. 1) When exactly can be the resume feature used? When the client doesn't properly end the stream? What about stream errors? 2) When exactly should be the resume connection ended and error returned for pending stanzas (apart from the timeout)? Does it mean that I loose connection on my laptop so I connect my mobile client... then talk with the same people e.g. for 20 minutes (the 'max' period) and then they get a bunch of errors that I didn't recieve their messages? > > In XEP-0198 (see example-2, > http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0198.html#example-2) , the servers > sends you back a max attribute with the longest allowable time to > reconnect. If that expires, the server assumes the connection is > dead, and cleans up. > > Best regards, -- Pavel Šimerda Freelancer v oblasti počítačových sítí, komunikace a bezpečnosti Web: http://www.pavlix.net/ Jabber & Mail: pavlix(at)pavlix.net OpenID: pavlix.net
