Re: Controversial: Have SIMPLE reached is goal? Or is it an IETF failure?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/18/12 12:56 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2012/10/18 Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>:
>> Olle, that statement has no basis in reality. Every XMPP server 
>> implementation on the planet is aware of the presence state for
>> each Jabber ID under its control.
> 
> Right, in fact the XMPP server decides which user resource to route
> a XMPP message based on its priority, am I right? (well, unless
> Gtalk that uses its own "XMPP"...).

The Google Talk service sends messages to all XMPP resources; this is
allowed by RFC 6120 and RFC 6121 but is not the traditional approach.

The primary reason why an XMPP server needs to be aware of the
presence state of the accounts registered at the service is so that it
can respond to presence probes. RFC 6121 describes this in great detail.

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlCAUgYACgkQNL8k5A2w/vxEugCg2YRBuxu7eFUFre+w6ihyrhHQ
i6IAn3BNaa7FulEFzhF3iXvbBzudM3bE
=RSQu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple