On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Jonathan Schleifer <js-xmppwg at webkeks.org> wrote: > Am 30.01.2010 um 23:29 schrieb Jonas Lindberg: > >> While I agree this would simplify the protocol a little, I am not >> convinced it is a change worth making. >> >> First of all, not responding to probe when unavailable is a pretty good >> optimization. A large part of Xmpp traffic is presence. This change would >> further significantly increase the presence traffic, making scaling more >> challenging and adding load to c2s and s2s connections. For example, a cell >> phone xmpp client may be better off not getting potentially thousands of >> presence unavailable stanzas for offline friends when connecting over gprs. >> >> I'm also not convinced this change make it significantly easier to >> implement xmpp clients/servers. Especially if we are going to recommend that >> clients and servers SHOULD cope with no response for legacy reasons. > > I think you got something wrong here: We are not talking about what happens > when you connect. We are talking about presence probes sent from one client > to a server. A mobile client would not get any unavailable presence more > than it would get now, expect it requests it by doing a probe. "4.3.2. Server Processing of Inbound Presence Probe", seems to apply to probes sent from clients as well as server generated probes, including those generated on initial presence. Not sure what I'm missing? How do I tell if "<presence from='juliet at example.com/balcony' to='benvolio at example.net' type='probe'/>" is sent by client or server generated? > > -- > Jonathan > >
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.