On 08/15/2012 06:18 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Yann Leboulanger<[email protected]> wrote:
On 08/15/2012 05:59 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Yann Leboulanger<[email protected]>
wrote:
On 08/15/2012 05:48 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Yann Leboulanger<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi,
I was wonder what should I do in this situation:
user A and B are connected with resource r1. They that, so messages go
from
A/r1 to B/r1.
user B connects a second client with resource r2 with a higher
priority.
Where should go next message of user A?
While I think 296 promotes unlocking more often than it should, in
this case I agree with it - the next message should go to the bare
JID. That a new resource has come online suggests a significant change
in the user's state.
Even if resource has a lower prio?
Yes, I think so.
Ok, then I'll have to restart the stanza negociation then (for E2E and
message archiving)
But I still think that's strange to unblock and restart the session if the
lower prio goes auto away for example.
Ah. This is where my disagreement with 296 starts coming out :)
I think that if there are two resources, and the unbound resource
becomes 'less available' (this isn't always easy to define, but there
are some cases that are trivial, like available->(away|na|dnd)) the
chat shouldn't be unbound.
That is, where A has resource a and B has resources 1 and 2 where all
resources start available.
Message A/a->B : B (both) binds chat to A/a
Message B/1 -> A/a : A binds chat to B/1
Presence B/2 goes away : A shouldn't unbind.
Presence B/2 becomes available again : A should unbind.
/K
Another case when behaviour might be strange:
3 resources R1 prio 1, R2 prio 2, R3 prio 3
R1 and R3 online.
R1 send un a message, so we reply there.
R2 comes online
next message will go to R3.
But once again I dont know if there is a best solution about what to do
in this case.
--
Yann
