On Monday 15 June 2009 12:53:35 Philipp Hancke wrote: > XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: > [snip] > > > 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? > > Session resumption is only explained for c2s. Can s2s explicitly be > declared out-of-scope due to possible interactions with multiplexing?
Are you suggesting that we should not have s2s session resumption, but you're okay with s2s acking? I think we do want session resumption over s2s. What interactions are a problem? Just keep the state, whatever it is. -Justin
