I think advice and a recommended course of action promotes
interoperability, and is backwards compatible. XEP-0001 also says such
modifications must be optional; obviously a SHOULD is not a MAY here, but I
think it's fairly clear that a decision to assume that an entity not
including disco#info within its disco#info response has ramifications which
should properly be understood prior to doing so.
IOW, I think this remains within the spirit, albeit not the letter, of the
Final requirements.
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 10:33, Kevin Smith <kevin.smith(a)isode.com> wrote:
I agree that a note would be helpful, but we're
only noting that bugged
implementations exist, I don't think that even adding a SHOULD here
falls within the spirit of the Final requirements. So I think the right
thing to do is to add a note saying such bugs exist, but not change
normative language.
/K
------ Original Message ------
From "Dave Cridland" <dave(a)cridland.net>
To "XMPP Standards" <standards(a)xmpp.org>
Date 12/03/2024 09:59:33
Subject [Standards] Re: Remove requirement to send disco#info feature in
XEP-0030
As others have said, it's a wart. Any protocol
has lots of them; XMPP
has always had its fair share. (You mention XEP-0045 briefly, and we're
all familiar that it's essentially a collection of warts at this
stage). This one is not, as far as I can see, harmful in any meaningful
way.
As Tedd Sterr notes, removing the reporting of disco#info support via
disco#info might leave no features at all, which might - small chance -
mean that implementations hit bugs.
I see no benefit to interoperability to remove it at this time.
However, I could see the benefit of adding a note to the effect of:
"Some entities are known not to advertise the
"http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info" feature within their responses,
contrary to this specification. Entities receiving otherwise valid
responses which do not include this feature SHOULD infer the support."
Dave.
On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 at 16:27, Jonas Schäfer <jonas(a)wielicki.name>
wrote:
>Dear community,
>
>it's been a while I spoke up here.
>
>I would like to discuss the removal of the following part-sentence
>from
>XEP-0030 (in Final status!):
>
> > every entity MUST support at least the
> > 'http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info' feature
>
>Announcing that feature is redundant: An entity which replies with a
>properly
>constructed `<query
xmlns="http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info"/>`
>element
>is bound to (and has always been bound to) have implemented XEP-0030
>to the
>best of its knowledge.
>
>As this is a Final(!) status XEP, here is my estimate of the impact
>this
>change has:
>
>- Implementations which required the presence of this feature on the
> receiving side would now become non-compliant: They might assume
> that the remote entity did not really support XEP-0030 and fail with
> an error.
>
> Such implementations would need to be adapted in order to be able to
> interoperate with implementations which follow a revised version of
> XEP-0030.
>
>I don't see any other impact. I also strongly suspect that the set of
>implementations which follow XEP-0030 to the letter is rather slim (I
>only
>know of a single one, which would be the Rust XMPP library xmpp-rs
>[1]).
>
>The reason why this came up: There have in the past been cases ([2]
>and
>another, not-yet-filed issue against Prosody IM where the disco#info
>feature
>is missing from MUCs) where implementations didn't emit this feature.
>The
>seeming pointlessness and lack of information conveyed by this feature
>var
>make it easy to overlook and low-priority to fix. The fact that this
>has gone
>undiscovered for at least one Prosody IM release cycle further
>supports the
>assumption that the number of implementations which rely on that part
>of the
>spec is rather small.
>
>Your input is welcome.
>
>kind regards,
>Jonas Schäfer
>(these days without "special" role in the standards process)
>
> [1]: And there exists at least one fork which removed that check:
>
https://gitlab.com/nesium/xmpp-rs/-/commit/1ddb050
> [2]:
>
https://issues.prosody.im/1664_____________________________________________…
>Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
>To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org