On 12/13/2011 10:01 PM, Matthew Wild wrote: > On 13 December 2011 14:16, Sergey Dobrov <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 12/13/2011 02:28 PM, Kevin Smith wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Sergey Dobrov <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The problem I have now is to understand the process to understand how >>>> can be done the same process for the PEP. And I testing on two ejabberds >>>> (2.1.7/2.1.9) that installed in my local network for testing purposes >>>> and I see that if A logs out and then logs in when B is permanently >>>> online then B sees only first A's status and never sees if changes >>>> status even if A logs out again, B still see like A is online! Have I to >>>> post a but to ejabberd or this is some kind of the protocol bug? >>> >>> See my earlier post with pointer to the appropriate RFC sections - the >>> server must transmit all of A's broadcast presences to B if B is in >>> A's roster with appropriate subscription state. >>> >>> /K >>> >> So that's a ejabberd bug and ejabberd must send presence changes forever >> since it received probe, right? >> > > I think you're missing Kevin's point. Not "since it received probe", > but "since it is in the roster with the appropriate subscription > state". > > Regards, > Matthew > ok, I got it, thank you.
-- With best regards, Sergey Dobrov, XMPP Developer and JRuDevels.org founder.
