Re: [Standards] Unclarified behavior in XEP-0047 (in-band bytestreams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 4/28/09 6:25 AM, Florian Zeitz wrote: > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 4/25/09 4:01 PM, JiYí Zárevúcký wrote: >>> "Upon receiving notice that a data packet is cannot be processed by >>> the recipient, the sender SHOULD consider the bytestream to be closed >>> and invalid but MAY attempt to correct the error and re-send the >>> offending data packet using the same sequence number (the recipient >>> MUST NOT consider a sequence number to have been used until the data >>> packet has been successfully processed)." >>> The sender must either resend data or explicitly close the stream by >>> sending the "close" query. Otherwise the recipient doesn't know >>> whether the sender wants to resend or not. Right? >> That is my understanding. > > In that case I would suggest changing the text a bit for clarity. > IMHO "consider the bytestream to be closed" != "should close the bytestream" Yes, I will clean up the text. I'm currently reviewing XEP-0065 (SOCKS5 Bytestreams), too, as well as the related Jingle specs, so I'll work on them all at once. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkn3A8oACgkQNL8k5A2w/vx6NwCg66JdE40sXOWZ04PZqnIhErGn akAAn2fRclpk/sgFwj4I4/kXTDBRMAH1 =4wx6 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Standards] Unclarified behavior in XEP-0047 (in-band bytestreams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 4/25/09 4:01 PM, JiYí Zárevúcký wrote: >> "Upon receiving notice that a data packet is cannot be processed by >> the recipient, the sender SHOULD consider the bytestream to be closed >> and invalid but MAY attempt to correct the error and re-send the >> offending data packet using the same sequence number (the recipient >> MUST NOT consider a sequence number to have been used until the data >> packet has been successfully processed)." > >> The sender must either resend data or explicitly close the stream by >> sending the "close" query. Otherwise the recipient doesn't know >> whether the sender wants to resend or not. Right? > > That is my understanding. > In that case I would suggest changing the text a bit for clarity. IMHO "consider the bytestream to be closed" != "should close the bytestream" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkn29aIACgkQ0JXcdjR+9YT1lQCgzPwugwLwZaMo91wSNdxwvtuf YLUAniop1yPuNMIz95WLyqMT5ZY+9KK2 =tbyw -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Standards] Unclarified behavior in XEP-0047 (in-band bytestreams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 4/25/09 4:01 PM, Jiří Zárevúcký wrote: > "Upon receiving notice that a data packet is cannot be processed by > the recipient, the sender SHOULD consider the bytestream to be closed > and invalid but MAY attempt to correct the error and re-send the > offending data packet using the same sequence number (the recipient > MUST NOT consider a sequence number to have been used until the data > packet has been successfully processed)." > > The sender must either resend data or explicitly close the stream by > sending the "close" query. Otherwise the recipient doesn't know > whether the sender wants to resend or not. Right? That is my understanding. > What confuses me it that in the case of invalid sequence number, the > one responsible for closing of the stream is the receiver: > > "The recipient MUST NOT process the data of such an out-of-sequence > packet, nor any that follow it within the same bytestream; instead, > the recipient MUST consider the bytestream invalid and SHOULD close > the bytestream as described in the next section." > > But that's also "SHOULD", not "MUST"... what happens if the recipient > doesn't close it? I think it would be best to change that last SHOULD to MUST. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkn2QWwACgkQNL8k5A2w/vxehwCfRUL8U116rpp629gC3r+6IHa2 t6sAniNyx1iI0mU9Oh2VUi0/OoLVVA8R =AjaZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[Standards] Unclarified behavior in XEP-0047 (in-band bytestreams)
"Upon receiving notice that a data packet is cannot be processed by the recipient, the sender SHOULD consider the bytestream to be closed and invalid but MAY attempt to correct the error and re-send the offending data packet using the same sequence number (the recipient MUST NOT consider a sequence number to have been used until the data packet has been successfully processed)." The sender must either resend data or explicitly close the stream by sending the "close" query. Otherwise the recipient doesn't know whether the sender wants to resend or not. Right? What confuses me it that in the case of invalid sequence number, the one responsible for closing of the stream is the receiver: "The recipient MUST NOT process the data of such an out-of-sequence packet, nor any that follow it within the same bytestream; instead, the recipient MUST consider the bytestream invalid and SHOULD close the bytestream as described in the next section." But that's also "SHOULD", not "MUST"... what happens if the recipient doesn't close it? Can this part be clarified and made sure that stream invalidation is in all cases obvious to both entities? Thanks :)
