[jdev] Figuring out what a client thinks its JID is

Paul Aurich paul at darkrain42.org
Mon Apr 5 17:13:11 CDT 2010

And Aaron Kryptokos spoke on 03/31/2010 02:50 AM, saying:
> Basically, our user instructions for broken clients is to log using
> their authentication username as the node in their JID, which is the
> only way to make many popular clients (such as Pidgin) work.  The
> problem we encounter is that most of these clients will operate in a
> reduced-functionality mode, because the client is unable to recognize
> stanzas that are directed to them if they have a 'to' attribute.

Pidgin does indeed not have the ability to differentiate authcid and
authzid (although I'm considering adding it based on the recent discussions
in the XMPP WG).  However, see below.

> One way to work around these clients is to perform translation on the
> 'to' attribute to whatever the client thinks its JID is.  The problem
> with this is the client never actually tells the server what it thinks
> its JID is.  Ideally, clients would always assume the JID that the
> server provides in resource binding, but in practice, most do not do
> this correctly.

Are you actually experiencing Pidgin/Finch/Adium/libpurple operating in
"reduced functionality mode"?   I'm absolutely sure that all recent
versions (and as far back as 2.2.0, which is where I got tired of checking)
of libpurple /do/ pick up their full JID from the <bind/> response (and
AFAIK, this works correctly, because it's used for Google Talk with

If you are experiencing issues with Pidgin in this environment, could you
explicate?  What features don't work when the usernames don't match?


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/jdev/attachments/20100405/7479dd9d/attachment.pgp>

More information about the JDev mailing list