24 Dec
2024
24 Dec
'24
9:19 a.m.
Sounds nothing that can be answered without a specific context (e.g. in context of a
specific XEP and use case)
What we could do is list the different IDs and its attributes and a recommendation for the
use case in which they are good and bad and why.
For Example
Message ID:
- Not Unique
- Chosen by the sender
Should not be used:
- Whenever its critical to identify a specific message
Can be used:
- Whenever it does not hurt to identify a wrong message, or if there is another attribute
that in combination allows to identify the correct message (e.g. LMC Attribute "It
must be the last message sent/received")
Recommendation:
Do not use for new XEPs, if for a use case a XEP needs to depend on client generated IDs
(Non-MUC), use origin-id.
Just an example, i do not claim correctness on this example.
Regards
Philipp
On Tue, Dec 24, 2024, at 16:32, Dave Cridland wrote:
Hi all,
Further to the note in the LC thread on XEP-0424, I'd really like to have a document
(XEP, probably) that answers these questions:
What are the risks of choosing an stanza identifier that is not unique?
Does this still matter if the stanza identifier is unique to the session? To the sending
jid? To the bare jid of the sender?
What about missing off the stanza id attribute entirely?
What about MUC? PubSub? Etc?
If people have opinions, write away, and I'll volunteer to collate these into a XEP
(or, possibly, a patch against XEP-0359).
My reasoning is that we seem to vaguely know things can get Bad, but I for one can't
find where we've documented these Bad Things. I'd be delighted to be corrected, as
ever.
Dave.
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org