+1 for this problem. I (tried) explained the same thing. On 03/02/2012 08:53 PM, Kevin Smith wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 2:13 AM, XMPP Extensions Editor <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Version 0.1 of XEP-0312 (PubSub Since) has been released. > > I have two main problems with this, the first is that using > timestamp-equivalents isn't a reliable way of syncing things on the > network. We have this approach in XEP-0045, and it results in > duplicates quite a lot of the time (without the added buffer period in > 312) I suspect it also results in missed messages, although I've > clearly never seen them. The buffer period makes missed messages less > likely (although still possible), but increases the chance of > duplicates. It's not clear to me that this isn't harmful. > > The second is that there are many other times a pubsub service will > receive delay inside a presence, and this proposal could result in > duplication within a single stream. > > /K >
-- With best regards, Sergey Dobrov, XMPP Developer and JRuDevels.org founder.
