[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       licq-devel
Subject:    Re: [Licq-devel] User Authorization
From:       Jon Keating <jonkeating () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-02-10 15:02:11
Message-ID: 6a0e94bd0602100702j2642e60t58a82baa9a239c7c () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 2/10/06, Mark Richards <m.richards@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>     I was wondering if there was a way to make the Licq client respect (or at
> least show the status for) users who require authorization.  I've had, over the
> last few months, problems with a couple users on my contact list who would show
> up as offline 99% of the time.  I discovered that it's because these users
> require authorization.  When I logged into ICQ2Go I found that these two problem
> users were on my "pending authorization" list.  It'd be nice if LICQ would
> indicate this somehow so that I could harass these users to authorize me and fix
> the online/offline problem.

Well, Licq puts them in the "pending authorization" list so we can
make a visual note in the contact list as well. I just wasn't sure
that you can't see them as online if they are in this group. Before it
didn't matter, you could still see them and everything, just not get
their IP I think. At some point, they changed that I guess.

> Strangely, it seems that when I, or the users in question, go online, they show
> up as online on my list.  However after some time they drop offline and I can no
> longer see them.  I had mentioned this to the list before and even collected
> some packet traces but never got around to sending them, but now I'm pretty sure
> it's because of the authorization thing.  I'm using the server-side contact list
> and I'm pretty sure that list indicates if the users are pending authorization,
> so I think LICQ should be able to tell.

There is some strange behaviour where users drop offline. I was
talking with somebody that showed me the dumps of these users and how
the packets are different. I'd really like to confirm it locally so I
am sure that these "user has gone offline" packets mean something
else. It just seems so strange for the protocol to have a user offline
packet mean something else...

Jon

________________________________________________________
Jon Keating                ICQ: 16325723
jon@licq.org               MSN: keating_jon@hotmail.com
http://www.licq.org        GPG: 2290A71F
http://www.thejon.org      HOME: Minamiashigara, Japan


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd_______________________________________________
Licq-devel mailing list
Licq-devel@licq.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]