Removing a resource cause inconsistency on a federation

When I remove an user from a server, all backlinks to this user will stay on every other servers. Causing inconsistency.

• UserA exists on ServerA
• UserA join CircleB on ServerB
• UserA is removed from ServerA
• UserA will still be member of CircleB on ServerB

@balessan @calummackervoy

mentioned in issue components/solid-xmpp-chat#168 (closed)

This issue makes adding users to new users to highly federated circles like #Make Hubl Better and #Hubl Club impossible, and is therefore hindering acquisition. It is a high priority for Hubl.

Have you tested this and it's a bug? It should send a Delete activity to the receiving server according to this test

Sure, happened on api.community.hubl.world & other instances.

On components/solid-xmpp-chat#168 (closed) https://api.casaco.hubl.world/users/aureliendenaes/ has been removed from this instance, but was still present on community hubl world.

Checked on community startinblox, have some like that too: https://api.community.startinblox.com/admin/djangoldp_account/ldpuser/169/change/ is a 404.

I'm probably stating the obvious here but the server sending the Delete activity should then ensure it was received, and if not, retry.

Related #249 (closed)

@alexbourlier : then we have to agree to invest 1.5 days of @calummackervoy work to make it happen, as estimated in the #249 (closed)

It was our decision not to do that in the first place, for budgets reasons.

As we are having repeated issues with the backlinks management, I would strongly advise on agreeing to finance this one so that Calum can improve that as soon as possible.

@balessan Can the framework I invest a part, or it has to be all from Hubl's budget?

🙂

The framework team can take on its budget to make it happen. It looks like a priority to me.

@balessan Do you mean you guys will finance the whole thing or just part of it?

🙂

They finance the whole thing. :-)

🥳

Any update here?

🙂

@alexbourlier thanks for upping but I think you're living with the guy working on that this week ( #249 (closed) ) so feel free to see with him if he's ok with the given initial deadline (23rd).

Good to know !!

The bad knows being he just broke his phone and so will probably be busy with that for some hours now.

@plup keep us posted

Looks like the wrong guy.

it's me haha. I've made a start on this, I think we're fine for 23rd :)

OK good news.

We'll have no way to clean up the databases with dead back-links, right?

I made a comment about that just now

possibly: after an expiry date, old Activity objects are deleted, with a cron job? I can't find in the ActivityPub spec when it's acceptable to delete old activities

mentioned in merge request !164 (merged)

closed via merge request !164 (merged)

mentioned in commit 680855d8