On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > > In its meeting yesterday, the XMPP Council agreed to issue a "Call for > Experience" regarding XEP-0199 (XMPP Ping), in preparation for perhaps > advancing this specification from Draft to Final in the XSF's standards > process. To help the Council decide whether this XEP is ready to advance > to a status of Final, the Council would like to gather the following > information: > > 1. Who has implemented XEP-0199? Please note that the protocol must be > implemented in at least two separate codebases (and preferably more). >
We have implemented it in Prosody. We don't actively use it (yet) but correctly answer pings from clients and other servers. We are discussing using XMPP pings to check s2s connections are still working prior to sending data after a long period of silence. As Dave writes, relying on TCP is not enough for various reasons. We also intend to use it to ping clients prior to replacing them in a resource conflict. > 2. Have developers experienced any problems with the protocol as defined > in XEP-0199? If so, please describe the problems and, if possible, > suggested solutions. > No problems. > 3. Is the text of XEP-0199 clear and unambiguous? Are more examples > needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST) appropriate? Have > developers found the text confusing at all? Please describe any > suggestions you have for improving the text. > Happy with it, short and sweet. I'm in favour of the changes Dave highlighted too. > If you have any comments about advancing XEP-0199 from Draft to Final, > please provide them by the close of business on Friday, May 22, 2009. > After the Call for Experience, this XEP might undergo revisions to > address feedback received, after which it will be presented to the XMPP > Council for voting to a status of Final. > Go! Matthew.
