Subject: [Simple] MSRP Comments - Keepalive

From: Aki Niemi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:02:34 +0300

Hi,

I know this is the sort of thing people usually use as flamebait, but I 
just have to ask ;-)

Why overload the SEND for keepalive? Is there a specific reason to 
minimize the number of methods in this protocol? I don't see the 
complexity added by having a function that clearly does something 
specific have its own method name, too.

Regards,
Aki

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:48:34 -0500

The reasoning was, from a relay's perspective, it watchers for IM 
traffic to determine liveness. Clients that don't have any _other_ 
traffic to send should just generate some frome time to time. There is 
nothing particularly special about the traffic generated. Sending an 
empty message seemed to have exactly these semantics.

 From an endpoints perspective, I could see adding a new method if we 
wanted some special semantic handling that is different than for SEND. 
But I don't see how the receiver semantics for a "KEEPALIVE" method 
would be any different than for an empty SEND method.

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:48:34 -0500