XEP-0352: Client State Indication

NOTICE: This document is currently within Last Call or under consideration by the XMPP Council for advancement to the next stage in the XSF standards process. The Last Call ends on 2015-09-07. Please send your feedback to the standards@xmpp.org discussion list.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

It is common for IM clients to be logged in and 'online' even while the user is not interacting with the application. This protocol allows the client to indicate to the server when the user is not actively using the client, allowing the server to optimise traffic to the client accordingly. This can save bandwidth and resources on both the client and server.

2. Requirements

The aim of this specification is to provide a simple and efficient protocol for the client to report its state to the server. Exactly how the server uses this information is beyond the scope of this document, although some examples are given.

Other extensions exist, such as Stanza Interception and Filtering Technology (XEP-0273) [1], which also aim to optimise the traffic between the client and server. A notable difference is that instead of being client-controlled, CSI shifts the responsibility to the server, and aims to just provide the server with enough information to implement various optimisations itself.

3. Use Cases

4. Protocol

      <stream:features>
        <bind xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-bind'/>
        <csi xmlns='urn:xmpp:csi:0'/>
      </stream:features>
    

      <inactive xmlns='urn:xmpp:csi:0'/>
    

      <active xmlns='urn:xmpp:csi:0'/>
    

5. Business Rules

As this protocol is for indication only, clients MUST NOT make assumptions about how the server will use the active/inactive state information.

The server MUST assume all clients to be in the 'active' state until the client indicates otherwise. Also the CSI active/inactive state is unrelated to the user's presence, the server MUST treat the two independently.

This protocol is intended primarily for clients with human interaction. Due to the open-ended nature of the possible optimisations implemented by the server, it may not be suitable for non-IM purposes where the fully standard behaviour of XMPP is required.

6. Security Considerations

To protect the privacy of users, servers MUST NOT reveal the clients active/inactive state to other entities on the network.

7. IANA Considerations

This document requires no interaction with the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) [3].

8. XMPP Registrar Considerations

This document requires no interaction with XMPP Registrar [4].

9. XML Schema

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>

<xs:schema
    xmlns:xs='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'
    targetNamespace='urn:xmpp:csi:0'
    xmlns='urn:xmpp:csi:0'
    elementFormDefault='qualified'>

  <xs:element name='csi' type='empty'/>
  <xs:element name='active' type='empty'/>
  <xs:element name='inactive' type='empty'/>

  <xs:simpleType name='empty'>
    <xs:restriction base='xs:string'>
      <xs:enumeration value=''/>
    </xs:restriction>
  </xs:simpleType>

</xs:schema>
    

Appendices

Appendix A: Document Information

Series: XEP
Number: 0352
Publisher: XMPP Standards Foundation
Status: Proposed
Type: Standards Track
Version: 0.1
Last Updated: 2014-08-28
Approving Body: XMPP Council
Dependencies: XMPP Core
Supersedes: None
Superseded By: None
Short Name: NOT_YET_ASSIGNED
Source Control: HTML
This document in other formats: XML  PDF

Appendix B: Author Information

Appendix C: Legal Notices

Appendix D: Relation to XMPP

The Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) is defined in the XMPP Core (RFC 6120) and XMPP IM (RFC 6121) specifications contributed by the XMPP Standards Foundation to the Internet Standards Process, which is managed by the Internet Engineering Task Force in accordance with RFC 2026. Any protocol defined in this document has been developed outside the Internet Standards Process and is to be understood as an extension to XMPP rather than as an evolution, development, or modification of XMPP itself.

Appendix E: Discussion Venue

The primary venue for discussion of XMPP Extension Protocols is the <standards@xmpp.org> discussion list.

Discussion on other xmpp.org discussion lists might also be appropriate; see <http://xmpp.org/about/discuss.shtml> for a complete list.

Errata can be sent to <editor@xmpp.org>.

Appendix F: Requirements Conformance

The following requirements keywords as used in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119: "MUST", "SHALL", "REQUIRED"; "MUST NOT", "SHALL NOT"; "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED"; "SHOULD NOT", "NOT RECOMMENDED"; "MAY", "OPTIONAL".

Appendix G: Notes

Appendix H: Revision History

Note: Older versions of this specification might be available at http://xmpp.org/extensions/attic/

END