[jdev] Re: bytestreams and Psi

[Mats Bengtsson]

Justin wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 November 2005 23:52, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> > What I meant is that we already have some kind of bytestream negotiation
> > with the <streamhost/> and <streamhost-used/> and mixing this with
> > sending special bytes seems pretty ugly.
> > It is a direct way to minimize the racing conditions, true.
> > But you still have it, although the risk is much smaller than if routed
> > directly as xml.
> 
> As far as I know, there is no risk at all.  You will have to explain what you 
> mean.

Sorry, I missed the last part here:
"To avoid a race condition, the stream to use is to be decided by the original initiator"
                                                                      ------------------
> 
> > The problem comes when you (we) allow symmetric streamhosts but it is
> > not an option to let the target timeout before it offers its streamhost.
> > I don't have any good ideas for a protocol to solve this sync problem.
> > Any ideas?
> 
> What is a "symmetric streamhost" ?  What do you mean to let the target timeout 
> before offering a streamhost?

I mean both target and initiator offer streamhosts. Symmetric.

I think I will give it a try anyway.
Does anyone the objections against this method to resolve the situation
when the initiator in nonreachable (behind NAT)?
Has this method been rejected formally by the Jabber guys?

Mats