[Standards] Resource unbinding issue - RFC 3920bis

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 00:22 +0200, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
>> rfc3920bis-03 says:
>>
>> 8.5.3.2.1.  Unbind Not Supported
>> If the server does not understand the <unbind/> element, it MUST return
>> a stanza error, which SHOULD be <bad-request/>.
>>
>> This is not backwards compatible.
>> Pre-bis servers would reply with <feature-not-implemented/> error rater
>> than <bad-request/>. This <unbind/> <iq/> is not a bad request for them,
>> but just another unimplemented feature.
> 
> Agreed. The request is not missing required attributes or the like, so I
> don't think that <bad-request/> is appropriate here. It is just a
> request in a known namespace with an unknown element name, and
> <feature-not-implemented/> seems appropriate here.

I gave this some thought before choosing <bad-request/>.

Basically there is a kind of philosophical issue here -- how does the
existing implementation know that <unbind/> is a feature at all? IMHO
<feature-not-implemented/> is appropriate when you have something like
pubsub (XEP-0060), where the features are well-defined and you know if
you don't support a given feature. But here the implementation doesn't
know that <unbind/> means anything, so as far as it is concerned this is
just a bad element that doesn't match the schema.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20071004/e8ad9bff/attachment.bin