We referred to Apple's TN2265 (https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/technotes/tn2265/_index.html) for implementing error handling in our app, which sends push notifications to our users. The documentation suggests that we deal with errors asynchronously, specifically:
If you get six bytes back, that's an error response that you can check for the response code and the ID of the notification that caused the error. You'll need to send every notification following that one again.
Is it the case that in a sequence of notifications, if one fails then all notifications following it are guaranteed to have failed? If not, then how does one avoid duplicate sends of the same notification to a given device?
Yes, in that case all the notifications following it are guaranteed to not even be processed by the APNS server.
When APNS detects an invalid message, it writes the error response to the socket and closes the connection. Until you receive that error response, it's possible that you already sent more messages to Apple on the same socket. All of them won't reach Apple. Once you create a new socket you should resend all of them.
There is no risk of duplicates.
Related
We send a lot of email messages from our Siebel 7.8 application, and we'd like to determine whether they have been successfully delivered or not.
According to the Bookshelf, if the SMTP server is down, the Communications Outbound Manager retries to send the message later, so that's not a problem. However, there are still plenty of issues which could cause an email to not be delivered, such as a typo in the address, the receiver having reached its storage quota, etc.
We send our messages this way:
var ps = TheApplication().NewPropertySet();
ps.SetProperty("ActivityId", outboundEmailActivityId);
ps.SetProperty("CommProfile", commProfile);
ps.SetProperty("ProcessMode", "Local");
var bs = TheApplication().GetService("Outbound Communications Manager");
bs.InvokeMethod("SendMessage", ps, psOut);
Using ProcessMode = Local allows us to detect a few errors. For example, if we try to send a message to a non-existant account in the same domain of our SMTP server, it returns 550 Unknown user and then 503 Must have sender and recipient first. The Outbound Communications Manager raises an exception, and we capture and handle it.
However, if we send a message to a non-existant account in a different domain, our SMTP server can't know that it will fail, and therefore it returns 250 Queued, and our code completes successfully. Later (it can range from seconds to a few hours later), we will receive a "Message undeliverable" error message, but at this point we only know that an outbound message failed, we don't know which one.
Is there any way in which Siebel can handle these 'Message undeliverable' notifications automatically?
We are thinking of writing our own process for that, but it seems like a huge task: we'd have to parse the delivery failure notification, identify the failing recipient, search for all the recent messages sent to that address, and somehow, guess which one failed (based on the Message-Id if we are lucky and can read it within Siebel, or on the Subject otherwise).
The problem is that SMTP is by its nature neither a synchronous nor reliable protocol (i.e. in the sense of "engineered for guaranteed delivery"). Your Siebel app server will connect to its assigned SMTP server and ask it to accept a message for delivery and at that time there are a few high level validations that can be perform (some of which you've mentioned but which can also include policy enforcement such as checking whether your (possibly anonymous) identity is authorized for relaying messages to external domains). Once that conversation ends, there is not much else you can reliably do because again, everything from that point is asynchronous and not guaranteed for delivery (any number of intermediate relay agents can be involved, each with their own potential for outages with or without retry, each with the ability to honor or ignore requests for delivery or read receipts or to report invalid recipients, throwing your message in a junk folder or not, etc.). Certainly you can attempt to work with any bounce notifications you do happen to get to try to correlate them back to the sender but that would be outside the context of your sending code.
I am using ejabberd server and ios xmppframework.
there are two clients, A and B.
When A and B are online, A can send message to B successfully.
If B is offline, B can receive the message when B is online again.
But when B is suddenly/unexpectedly lost connection, such as manually close wi-fi, the message sent by A is lost. B will never
receive this message.
I guess the reason is that B lost connection suddenly and the server still think B is online. Thus the offline message does work under this condition.
So my question is how to ensure the message that sent by A will be received by B? To ensure there is no messages lost.
I've spent the last week trying to track down missing messages in my XMPPFramework and eJabberd messaging app. Here are the full steps I went through to guarantee message delivery and what the effects of each step are.
Mod_offline
In the ejabberd.yml config file ensure that you have this in the access rules:
max_user_offline_messages:
admin: 5000
all: 100
and this in the modules section:
mod_offline:
access_max_user_messages: max_user_offline_messages
When the server knows the recipient of a message is offline they will store it and deliver it when they re-connect.
Ping (XEP-199)
xmppPing = XMPPPing()
xmppPing.respondsToQueries = true
xmppPing.activate(xmppStream)
xmppAutoPing = XMPPAutoPing()
xmppAutoPing.pingInterval = 2 * 60
xmppAutoPing.pingTimeout = 10.0
xmppAutoPing.activate(xmppStream)
Ping acts like a heartbeat so the server knows when the user is offline but didn't disconnect normally. It's a good idea to not rely on this by disconnecting on applicationDidEnterBackground but when the client looses connectivity or the stream disconnects for unknown reasons there is a window of time where a client is offline but the server doesn't know it yet because the ping wasn't expected until sometime in the future. In this scenario the message isn't delivered and isn't stored for offline delivery.
Stream Management (XEP-198)
xmppStreamManagement = XMPPStreamManagement(storage: XMPPStreamManagementMemoryStorage(), dispatchQueue: dispatch_get_main_queue())
xmppStreamManagement.autoResume = true
xmppStreamManagement.addDelegate(self, delegateQueue: dispatch_get_main_queue())
xmppStreamManagement.activate(xmppStream)
and then in xmppStreamDidAuthenticate
xmppStreamManagement.enableStreamManagementWithResumption(true, maxTimeout: 100)
Nearly there. The final step is to go back to the ejabberd.yml and add this line to the listening ports section underneath access: c2s:
resend_on_timeout: true
Stream Management adds req/akn handshakes after each message delivery. On it's own it won't have any effect on the server side unless that resend_on_timeout is set (which it isn't by default on eJabberd).
There is a final edge case which needs to be considered when the acknowledgement of a received message doesn't get to the server and it decides to hold it for offline delivery. The next time the client logs in they are likely to get a duplicate message. To handle this we set that delegate for the XMPPStreamManager. Implement the xmppStreamManagement getIsHandled: and if the message has a chat body set the isHandledPtr to false. When you construct an outbound message add an xmppElement with a unique id:
let xmppMessage = XMPPMessage(type: "chat", to: partnerJID)
let xmppElement = DDXMLElement(name: "message")
xmppElement.addAttributeWithName("id", stringValue: xmppStream.generateUUID())
xmppElement.addAttributeWithName("type", stringValue: "chat")
xmppElement.addAttributeWithName("to", stringValue: partnerJID.bare())
xmppMessage.addBody(message)
xmppMessage.addChild(xmppElement)
xmppMessage.addReceiptRequest()
xmppStream.sendElement(xmppMessage)
Then when you receive a message, inform the stream manager that the message has been handled with xmppStreamManager.markHandledStanzaId(message.from().resource)
The purpose of this final step is to establish a unique identifier that you can add to the XMPPMessageArchivingCoreDataStorage and check for duplicates before displaying.
I guess the reason is that B lost connection suddenly and the server
still think B is online. Thus the offline message does work under this
condition
Yes you are absolutely correct,this is well known limitation of TCP connections.
There are two approaches to your problem
1 Server side
As I can see you are using ejabbed as XMPP server you can implement
mod_ping , Enabling this module will enables server side
heartbeat[ping] ,in case of broken connection to server[ejabbed] will
try to send heartbeat to connection and will detect connection is lost
between server and client. Use of this approach has one
drawback,module mod_ping has property called ping_interval which
states how often to send heartbeat to connected clients, here lower
limit is 32 seconds any value below 32 is ignored by ejabbed,means
you have 32 seconds black window in which messages can be lost if user
is sowing as online
2 Client side
From client side you can implement Message Delivery Receipts
mechanism .With each Chat message send a receipt to receiver user of
as soon as receiver user receives message send back this receipt
id. This way you can detect that your message is actually delivered to
receiver. If you don't receive such acknowledgement between certain
time interval you can show user as offline locally(on mobile
phone),store any further messages to this user as offline message
locally[in SQLLight database ],and wait for offline presence stanza for that user
,as soon as you receive offline presence stanza it means that server
has finally detected connection to that user is lost and makes user
status as offline ,now you can send all messages to that user ,which
will be again stored as offline messages on server.This is best
approach to avoid black-window.
Conclusion
You can either use Approach 2 and design you client such way ,you can also use Approach 1 along with approach 2 to minimize server broken connection detraction time.
If B goes offline suddenly then user A have to check if B is online/offline while sending message to user B. If user B is offline then user A have to upload that message on Server using Web service. And user B have to call web service on below function.
- (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions
So user B will get that all offline message which was lost due to connection Lost.
At last, I use Ping together with Stream Management:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0198.html
This problem is solved.
I'm using the XMPP protocol in order to send and receive messages with the Facebook chat.
I'm able to receive messages, and as well get the typing notifications.
My problem is that I'm not receiving the 'typing paused' notification.
My app has successfully made the auth procedure and when the user is typing a message I'm receiving the 'composing' message but when he stops typing I'm not getting the 'paused' message that is documented in the XEP-0085 protocol.
Thanks
The answer is most likely that Facebook doesn't support <paused/>. Only support for <active/> and <composing/> is absolutely required by the XEP.
Your client should handle <paused/> appropriately, but also handle not receiving it just fine too.
How the server know whether the push notification received by iPhone(and also the action that user performed (tapping "Cancel" or "View")). Do i need to send separate message from client to server that "Notification received" or Is There any mechanism to get status from APNS by server so that I can avoid sending a message from client side.
I have checked enter and Push notification guide, but I didn't find any information.
As per the documents there is no guarantee for a notification to be received successfully. Also APNS won't inform the server about a successful delivery of push notification. So better
on the method
- (void)application:(UIApplication *)application didReceiveRemoteNotification:(NSDictionary *)userInfo
{
//you can send a message to the server so that server can make sure that notification is delivered successfully.
}
FYI : If notifications to a particular device token is getting failed continously the APNS will inform about that.
From apple docs
"Apple Push Notification Service includes a feedback service that APNs continually updates with a per-application list of devices for which there were failed-delivery attempts. The devices are identified by device tokens encoded in binary format. Providers should periodically query the feedback service to get the list of device tokens for their applications, each of which is identified by its topic. Then, after verifying that the application hasn’t recently been re-registered on the identified devices, a provider should stop sending notifications to these devices. "
I am using MFMessageComposeViewController to send sms within my app. Everything is correct until i try to get the result of the operation. Actually the Message sending failed as It can be seen in the SMS native app (I have no service in the sim card), but I get MessageComposeResultSent in - (void)messageComposeViewController:(MFMessageComposeViewController *)controller didFinishWithResult:(MessageComposeResult)result.
Have you ever gone though this? Could we get a real assert that the sms has been properly sent?
Thanks a lot.
Here is a snippet from the MessageComposeResult struct's discussion in MFMessageComposeViewController.h :
Typically MessageComposeResultSent
will be sent, but
MessageComposeResultFailed will be
sent in the case of failure. Send may
only be interpreted as a successful
queueing of the message for later
sending. The actual send will occur
when the device is able to send.