On 5 Oct 2017, at 10:54, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>
> On 05.10.2017 11:20, Kevin Smith wrote:
>> I’m not sure that the sides need to agree on timeouts. As long as each side
>> does sensible pinging (only when the stream is silent) and not blindly every
>> X seconds, they can both satisfy whatever
On 05.10.2017 11:20, Kevin Smith wrote:
> I’m not sure that the sides need to agree on timeouts. As long as each side
> does sensible pinging (only when the stream is silent) and not blindly every
> X seconds, they can both satisfy whatever their own requirements are.> That
> effectively leads t
On 5 Oct 2017, at 07:26, vaibhav singh wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>> On 04.10.2017 07:34, Georg Lukas wrote:
>> > * vaibhav singh [2017-10-03 15:45]:
>> >> After Service Discovery is done, the pinging and the pinged entity could
>> >> negotiate a
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 04.10.2017 07:34, Georg Lukas wrote:
> > * vaibhav singh [2017-10-03 15:45]:
> >> After Service Discovery is done, the pinging and the pinged entity could
> >> negotiate a timeout between themselves (one of them could dictate what
> >>
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:04 PM, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> On Dienstag, 3. Oktober 2017 19:13:47 CEST vaibhav singh wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi!
>
> > One of my colleagues is working our XMPP server, and saw an issue which
> > seems foreign to me (I am also kind of new to XMPP).
> >
> > The issue is, in o
On 04.10.2017 07:34, Georg Lukas wrote:
> * vaibhav singh [2017-10-03 15:45]:
>> After Service Discovery is done, the pinging and the pinged entity could
>> negotiate a timeout between themselves (one of them could dictate what
>> timeout to use, or both parties could suggest timeouts and we use t
* vaibhav singh [2017-10-03 15:45]:
> After Service Discovery is done, the pinging and the pinged entity could
> negotiate a timeout between themselves (one of them could dictate what
> timeout to use, or both parties could suggest timeouts and we use the one
> which is lower).
This is actually a
On 10/3/17 2:27 PM, Kim Alvefur wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 09:53:06AM -0500, Sam Whited wrote:
>> I suspect it would be easier to only send a ping if you haven't heard
>> anything from the client in some configurable amount of time
>
> This is in line with what XMPP Core says here:
> https:/
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 09:53:06AM -0500, Sam Whited wrote:
> I suspect it would be easier to only send a ping if you haven't heard
> anything from the client in some configurable amount of time
This is in line with what XMPP Core says here:
https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#streams-silence
--
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017, at 08:43, vaibhav singh wrote:
> some XMPP clients send their own pings whose timeouts
> cannot be configured. This results in ping-pong packets coming and going
> around a lot, and awkward interactions (the client may think that the
> server is down but server may not, in case
On Dienstag, 3. Oktober 2017 19:13:47 CEST vaibhav singh wrote:
> Hi,
Hi!
> One of my colleagues is working our XMPP server, and saw an issue which
> seems foreign to me (I am also kind of new to XMPP).
>
> The issue is, in order to check whether the client is up or not, our XMPP
> server implem
Hi,
One of my colleagues is working our XMPP server, and saw an issue which
seems foreign to me (I am also kind of new to XMPP).
The issue is, in order to check whether the client is up or not, our XMPP
server implemented XEP-0199 from the server side (S2C) which is enabled by
default, and the pe
12 matches
Mail list logo
