Am Montag, den 28.09.2020, 09:51 +0100 schrieb Dave Cridland: > > > On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 at 16:46, Holger Weiß <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I think it would be good to find a better solution. > > OK, just out of curiosity, why?
I for one want that to be formalized. So far the formal response to that problem in the XEP is mere acknoledgement of the problem and its declaration to be out of scope. Which invites for follow-up and resolution. The de-facto state is based on hell lot of assumptions which are not formalized anywhere. Message id - not mandated. Message frame storage - not mandated. To store any data allowing the dedup - not mandated. > > (2) and (3) (and your un-numbered proposal) cause both an additional > response *and* a further '198 ack back from the client to acknowledge > that response, which seems dramatically ugly. It is in general off-topic but I'd expect behaving client to do selective 198 ack (window and time based - as per 198's recommendation) rather than blind _every stanza_, so that does not put major concern to me. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
