[jdev] Re: S2S and SASL

[Vinod Panicker]

On 7/29/05, Justin Karneges <justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com> wrote:
> On Friday 29 July 2005 01:56 am, Vinod Panicker wrote:
> > I was stating that the RFC is silent about stanza communications
> > starting as soon as one connection is successful, before the
> > complementary connection has been established.
> 
> Good point, it could be interpretted that you must have both connections
> established even if you are only sending in one direction.

Do I need to inform anyone specifically to get this added into the
next version of the RFC or assume that it would be done?

> > > Failed s2s connections can happen at any time, SASL or not.  I don't
> > > think a failed inbound s2s connection should have any effect on
> > > established s2s connections.  So in your example you'd be stuck with a
> > > one-way channel.
> >
> > Any recommendations / standard practices on what to do in case of a
> > situation like this?
> 
> Do nothing?  I'm pretty sure that's what all the existing servers do today.

So can we safely state that if server A needs to send a stanza to
server B, there is no need for server B to establish a connection to
server A unless in the case of an error?

Regards,
Vinod.