[standards-jig] Pondering DTCP
m at tthias.net
Thu Dec 12 21:53:31 UTC 2002
Justin Karneges wrote:
>>There ARE always better ways to transfer files ... the client authors
>>just have to implement it.
>When I first wrote up IBB, it was intended to be used as just a transitional
>protocol. That is, until proxies became more common. Later though, I
>noticed many admins saying that they would never install a proxy. What is a
>user to do in that case?
>I will quote JEP-0047:
>"...useful for sending small payloads, such as files that would otherwise be
>... impossible to send (such as a small binary image file..."
I didn't took the decision to block iib easy. E.g. if clients would
implement ibb to transfer emoticons or things like that inband it would
be okay to me (maybe I'd still not like it), but the only implementation
I am aware of offers IBB to the user to transfer arbitrary files (and
that is something I really don't like).
If I see that most ibb implementing clients use it in a reasonable way,
I would remove the block again. But there is no such implementation yet.
I really hope that Jabber clients will improve their support for file
transfers. This can be done by better support for proxies (http and
socks), PASS and external http-helper-servers (servers a user can put
files on - this would also allow to have offline file transfers).
If a server admin does not install a proxy for his users the users could
use a service offered by an other Jabber server. Most Jabber servers
today offer their services also to users of other servers.
Fon: +49-(0)70 0770 07770 http://matthias-wimmer.de/
Fax: +49-(0)89-312 88 654 jabber://email@example.com
More information about the Standards