On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 19:19, Matthew Wild <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 February 2011 00:09, Justin Karneges > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Saturday 12 February 2011 12:14:34 Matthew Wild wrote: >>> > >>> I'm not convinced that we need a solution for this (I'm not sure if in >>> the real world, a server would actually stop reading from a client for >>> 60s or more). However if consensus is that this is something we need >>> to fix, I think Justin's on the right track and I wouldn't oppose >>> standardising "whacks" (at last!). >> >> jabberd1 penalizes for over a minute, which is the inspiration for this >> discussion. Newer servers are not nearly as aggressive. But, from where I >> sit, those design decisions seem arbitrary and there's nothing to say that >> other servers couldn't adopt similar policies. >> > > That's as may be, but I still lean towards the onus being on the > server developers to ensure they don't create wacky situations like > this. Still, as I said, I'm not against a spec. > > Maybe we just want a whole informational XEP on how clients/servers > should detect broken streams correctly, and how to throttle with > minimal chance of breaking things.
oh double +1 triple-like someone-give-me-a-heart-button This would also form the basis for an conformity validator > > Regards, > Matthew > -- Bear [email protected] (email) [email protected] (xmpp, email) [email protected] (xmpp, email) http://code-bear.com/bearlog (weblog) PGP Fingerprint = 9996 719F 973D B11B E111 D770 9331 E822 40B3 CD29
