Hi Kev,

* Kevin Smith <[email protected]> [2017-10-04 11:43]:
> Thanks for the write-up. I agree this is a problem worth solving.

Thanks for the feedback!

> I think (3) seems like it has nice properties in terms of a single
> round-trip, but I think (2) is the preferable option in practice. It’s
> simple to implement for everyone (3 is quite complex) [...]

I agree that a new IQ (2) is trivial to implement, but I'm not sure if
there is significant complexity in the (3) approach - as Jonas wrote, it
just another way to re-synchronize a client, something that should
already happen by means of a regular MUC join presence, plus an injected
presence to the initiating client.

On the client side, the number of self-ping implementing clients is very
low currently, and those implementations are complex already, if they
use a 0199 + rejoin combo. The benefit of (2) would be that clients can
have a simple switch for backward-compatible participant-JID-ping vs.
modern MUC-JID-presence-check IQ, and reuse the actual timeout & re-join
logic. However, if a client developer is sufficiently motivated to add
self-ping now, a proper solution might be an additional motivation
boost.

> makes it easier if one wants to write a MIX proxy (so allowing users
> to join MUCs as if they were MIXs, and have the server do all the work
> for them - which would be a nice thing, I think).

I'm with you here - the self-ping would have to be implemented by the
proxy (if at all), but you have to implement it anyway to provide
reliable functionality, be it (2) or (3).

> As it’s a sticking plaster, and we’re trying to fix things properly,
> going with a sticking plaster iq seems ok to me (as is more likely to
> get the needed wide deployment).

I'm not sure what you mean by "fix things properly" - MIX? Even if a
plethora of MIX implementations should magically appear overnight, I'm
sure we'll stick with MUC for a long time (though hopefully not as long
as with GC1.0 now).


Georg
-- 
|| http://op-co.de ++  GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N  ++
|| gpg: 0x962FD2DE ||  o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+  ||
|| Ge0rG: euIRCnet ||  X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e++++ h- r++ y?   ||
++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_________________________________________________||

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to