Hi,

To start a link-local conversation with XEP-0174 between two clients,
any of the 2 clients can initiate the stream. If the 2 contacts start
to chat at the same time, we may have 2 streams initiated in both
directions. It seems this case does not happen often because users
usually don't start to chat precisely at the same time.

You suggested that having several streams between 2 clients was not a
problem:

Le Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:51:06 -0600,
Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Alban Crequy wrote:
> > If we want the XEP to say there can be only one stream between two
> > clients, we should define the correct behaviour when two clients
> > initiate a TCP connection to each other at the same time. Do we
> > want one connection to win and the second to be closed?
> 
> I don't think we need to restrict clients to one stream at a time.

However, if the 2 clients both implement XEP-030 Service Discovery and
XEP-0115 Entity Capabilities, they will both initiate a stream in order
to send a discovery request as soon as they appear online via DNS-SD,
without user intervention.

Do we want this to happen? Sjoerd suggested on IRC to add random slack
time before initiating a stream to avoid it. XEP-0174 can spec some
guide-lines. Either how to avoid it, or spec that implementations MUST
handle several streams correctly.

Should statefull stanza (iq requests/replies) always use the same
stream, if there is several streams?

When a stream is closed because a timeout is reached, can we open a new
stream to send the <iq type="result"> corresponding to the <iq
type="get"> from the previous stream?

When someone joins a local network, we may receive plenty of TCP
connections from local contacts. The XEP-00174 suggests that the
implementation can wait user approval before accepting to open the
stream: 

XEP-0174:
> Your client then responds with a response stream header (perhaps
> subject to user approval -- it's not always safe to chat with
> strangers!).

It seems undesirable to ask user approval just to send contact
capabilities.

-- 
Alban

Reply via email to