[ejabberd] Losing messages to dead connections
rduke496 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 24 02:41:04 MSK 2014
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sat, 22 Mar 2014 18:32:44 +0000
> Raoul Duke <rduke496 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Before I move on I have a question: why does ejabberd not notice that
>> the send to the "dead connection" failed? i.e. if the other end is
>> gone/dead and therefore not ACK-ing the TCP send from ejabberd then
>> why doesn't ejabberd notice this and deem the message as undelivered?
> Because the TCP connection is alive as reported by network layer. If
> it's closed (as reported by network layer) ejabberd treats the user as
> offline. On and on this question goes. Go to networking ietf wg and
> blame them.
The question was not meaning to search for blame but for
reasons/scenarios that would cause it to happen. The message was
posed in good faith to gain knowledge from the ejabberd experts and
with considerable context provided about the problem and possible
solutions I was investigating and after having searched archives for
similar questions in the past.
It is unfortunate for me, and future readers of this list, that you
find one particular part of my message so tiresome that you chosen to
give this condescending/unhelpful response to one small part of it.
I hope this is not the general tone of this mailing list.
More information about the ejabberd