Hi Bernd, yes I am talking about c) I already thought about the problem, that I only have to do this on connection breakdown, but I did not see how to make the distinction. I do not even have enough knowledge to set up a proper test case :( I only can test with my smack client by now. If you gave me some directions where to look at I ll try and provide a test case.
BTW I saw that I get the avaiable message twice when a user connects, that doesn't hurt me, but I guess its not intended, is it ? Greetings from Hamburg Thomas 2010/3/8 Bernd Fondermann <bf_...@brainlounge.de>: > Thomas Kratz wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I don't know if my question yesterday was concrete enough. >> >> I try to send an unavailable message when the connection breaks down >> and I wonder if I can somehow wait for the message to go out. > > Wait a second. > > There are different cases: > > a. Client sends <pres unavail.../> and keeps connection alive > b. Client sends <pres unavail.../> (maybe followed by a </stream:stream> > and closes the socket > c. Client dies, Routing is broken, Socket cannot transport packets > successfully end-to-end and the server detects this, because the socket > gets closed - this is without the client notifying the server of anything > d. Server goes down and is in process of ending all sessions > > Up until now, I thought we were talking c., right? > a. is (should be) already working > b. is not fully working, but we would be working on the wrong end then > d. must be handled completely different. > > So, what is/are your case(s)? > >> Because >> afterwards the session gets CLOSED and an unbind happens, which now >> makes my attempt to send the unavailable break. > >> Or is there a way to >> send a Stanza synchronuosly? > > in MinaBackedSessionContext there is write(Stanza). This is a hack. So > is everything attached to VYSPER-185. > > Bernd > > > -- http://www.buchmanager.com http://thomaskratz.blogspot.com
