Skip to content

Add client consideration for labeled-response (batch vs non-batch) #493

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
24 changes: 24 additions & 0 deletions extensions/labeled-response.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -91,6 +91,30 @@ When a client sends a private message to its own nick, `echo-message` will resul

Both methods assume that the server will acknowledge all successful messages, or return a labeled error response, but differ in their attitude towards the semantics of sending and receiving.

### Batched vs. non-batched responses

This section is non-normative.

Servers may give a batched or non-batched response, based on whether the reply consists of more than one message.

However, it's difficult to know which will be generated in advance for a given request.

It might depend on server configuration, modes, or in some cases, may change as a result of future extensions.

For example, `MODE MyNick`:

Client: @label=sdGoz6kZKS MODE MyNick
Server: @label=sdGoz6kZKS :irc.example.com 221 MyNick +itwxz

`MODE MyNick` as an oper:

Client: @label=CtmpopxyQ6 :irc.example.com BATCH +B0aLFZRI labeled-response
Server: @batch=B0aLFZRI :irc.example.com 221 MyNick +iostwxz
Server: @batch=B0aLFZRI :irc.example.com 008 MyNick +bcdfkoqsBOS :Server notice mask
Server: :irc.example.com BATCH -B0aLFZRI

Clients may prefer to handle all labeled responses as if they were a BATCH, even in the single message case, for robustness and compatibility.

## Bouncer implementation considerations

This section is non-normative.
Expand Down