[Council] VOTE: JEP-0013 (Flexible Offline Message Retrieval)

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Gah myself. :)

Joe and Ryan both provide good feedback, but I won't have time to
address it until I return from the IETF meeting in Vienna. So this
Friday at the earliest.

Peter

On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 01:29:57PM -0500, Thomas Muldowney wrote:
> Gah, all the recent noise on the lists and my sickness made me forget to
> read this.  Just went over it and I'm +1 once Joe's concerns are
> cleared.
> 
> As to #3, I agree it can be opaque unless we're trying to give the node
> name some meaning, but that doesn't seem to make sense when we already
> stamp offlined msgs.
> 
> --temas
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2003-07-14 at 09:20, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> > Sorry.. I was hoping someone else was going to nitpick this one.
> > 
> > 1) There are no error codes specfified.  
> > - disco#items, no such node
> > - disco#items, unauthorized (both of these are probably in disco)
> > - view, no such node
> > - view, unauthorized
> > - delete, no such node
> > - delete, unauthorized
> > 
> > 2) Security considerations: Server MUST NOT deliver offline messages to
> > others.  (except MAYbe for admins)
> > 
> > 3) Why is the syntax of the node attribute specified?  Can it just be
> > opaque?