On 01/29/2010 05:39 AM, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> Hm, this sounds to me like killing resources all together. Why not let
> the user decide? For example, if the user gives all resources the same
> priority, all resources get the message. If the user decides to use
> different priorities, only the one with the higehst gets it (if 2 are
> sharing the highest prio, both should get it).
>
> I think priorities and resources are one of the killer features of
> XMPP and should not be removed or crippled.
Priorities and resource-based routing are killer features only if you
happen to be a member of the relatively small XMPP developer community
-- for IM users it's just confusing and unnecessary. They want to login
a client and get instant messages.
Missing IMs because you accidentally left yourself logged in on another
machine, or because Client X has different default priority settings
than Client Y is inconvenient, annoying and prone to error. These is
nothing in the wording change that's going to _force_ implementations
into a different behavior, but with luck it'll encourage servers and
clients to move towards more explicit solutions to choosing sessions for
message delivery, i.e. privacy lists, SIFT and Mine-ing.
My opinion, anyhow.
Ben
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.