2017-05-30 15:00 GMT+02:00 Daniel Gultsch <[email protected]>: > I noticed that some CSI implementations (and maybe some SM > implementations as well) add a delayed delivery tag where the from is > set to their own domain. > > However that gets us into trouble in at least one scenario: > Namely when parsing the timestamp of a unavailable presence. > Unavailable presences come in two forms. Either they don't have a > delayed delivery or they have one where from is their server. > To reliably tell the the timestamp of an offline presence we have to > be able to tell if it was delayed by our own CSI/SM or by the remote > server. This is impossible for contacts that are on the same server. > For this reason I propose that CSI and SM implementations if they > choose to add a delayed delivery element it should come from the > account and not the server. > (Neither XEP mentions how to deal with delayed delivery but a lot of > implementations do. So I'd propose to make it OPTIONAL to add it but > if they add it MUST be the accounts bare jid)
To be clear: This is for server implementations and not for clients resending messages after a SM resume. Also it should be debated if we make adding delayed delivery tags a SHOULD for SM and CSI since most implementations are doing this anyway and for good reason. I just said OPTIONAL because it is the least disruptive to the existing ecosystem. And I would really really like to avoid a namespace bump. cheers Daniel _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
