On 10.06.2015 10:56, Dave Cridland wrote: > On 10 June 2015 at 05:58, Daniel Gultsch <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Even though not yet quite perfect (see the discussion about > Message-ID and MR2) MAM works reasonable well. A MAM capable client > has no trouble to automatically catch up with lost messages. > However if the MAM capable client is the only client in the game it > will (with normal setups) regularly receive both the offline > messages and the messages downloaded from the MAM archive. Now > client side de-duplication usually works good enough for the average > user not to notice however this is far from being an ideal solution. > > Is there a solution to this problem that can simply be solved by > server side configuration? > Will simply disabling offline message return all messages to the > sender even though they are stored in MAM? > > Maybe it is time to develop some business rules or best practises > that deal with this scenario > > For offline messages and MAM-capable clients, there's always XEP-0013, > though that's rather more heavyweight than we need.
Why not simply state in the MAM XEP, that if a offline message is delivered to the user by means of MAM, it's removed from the pool of offline messages? This means MAM clients could use the approach of xep13: 1. authenticate 2. do MAM query: get all messages since X 3. establish presence session <no duplicate offline messages here, since they got removed by 2.> - Florian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
