On Sunday 05 October 2008 15:42:07 Dave Cridland wrote: > On Sun Oct 5 10:33:46 2008, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > > If you get a conflict, you can continue and replace the old > > resource. > > > > IIRC, with the current RFC, it's undefined what the server does > > then, but most replace it. This should be clearified IMO so that > > the RFC says it should be replaced then. > > FWIW, we conflict. I have some ideas for how to do replacement > sensibly, but terminating a live client means risking the ping-pong > effect that server administrators hate.
Clients being kicked due to a remote connection shouldn't automatically reconnect. Ping-pong connections were certainly a problem pre-RFC, when we had no protocol for indicating that a connection is being replaced, but today this should be a solved problem. -Justin
