On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 at 09:23, Matthew Wild <mwi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, 15:05 Florian Schmaus, <f...@geekplace.eu> wrote: > >> >> Zash's proposal is, as far as I understand it, just an optimization >> allowing a sending entity to determine if a stanza will hit the limit or >> not, without trying to actually send it. > > > It is and it isn't. Right now, if a stanza is over the limit then most > implementations will close the connection with a stream error. Not closing > the connection is non-trivial for implementations if they want to avoid DoS > and use a standard parser. >
I think this is a good summary of why the <max-bytes/> is needed - it allows a sending implementation to alter its behaviour for the better. I don't think there's the same justification for <idle-seconds/>, though, is there? What would a sending implementation do? Defeat the idle check? To what end? I *thought* we recommended a proper liveness check, so in principle the idle timeout is a mere implementation detail, and shouldn't alter behaviour on the other side. Also, is it worth including a full stream features inside (or after?) bidi? (I've lost track of how well bidi is implemented, and therefore whether it's worth doing a version-bump, but this is the first case I'm aware of where bidi would include a child element, so maybe a version bump here is easiest?)
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
