[standards-jig] JIDs

Julian Missig julian at jabber.org
Mon Feb 4 21:21:34 UTC 2002


On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 14:45, Iain Shigeoka wrote:
> On 2/2/02 5:53 AM, "Matthias Wimmer" <jabber at matthias-wimmer.de> wrote:
> 
> > Is there any clearer documentation of what characters are allowed within
> > JIDs than http://docs.jabber.org/proto/html/identity.html?
> > The above document just reference to RFC2396. But I don't think all our
> > used JIDs conform with this RFC. Think about the two SMTP gateway
> > implementations we have. They use "user%smtp-domain at gateway-domain" as
> > JID. This JID doesn't conform the BNF grammar in appendix A. The problem
> > with it is the "%". This character is (according to the given syntax)
> > only allowed as first of three characters in an "escaped" (the other two
> > characters have to be hex digits.
> 
> I think the document is the best source for information and that the
> referenced RFC is the correct standard for conforming JIDs.
> 
> > Should the "%" character be allowed within the user part of a JID or
> > not? If it's allowed we can't refer to RFC2396.
> 
> Ironically,  I think that the reality of the situation is that many things
> just don't comply with the standard.  :)  This is a combination of people
> not reading the spec, no compliance tests, and people operating under
> Postel's robustness principle ("be conservative in what you send, liberal in
> what you accept").  In fact, the gateway usage of the % in the username is
> sort of a de facto standard as most of us like to be consistent with the
> established patterns in existing gateways.
> 
> So you are correct in both the standard and the fact that many things are
> non-compliant.  Which raises an interesting standards-jig question: should
> we try and crack down on these violations, change the standards to fit the
> implementations, or continue with the status quo?
> 

My vote is to first get clients and transports to support iq:gateway,
then to crack down on violations...

Maybe sometime this week I'll write up a JEP for iq:gateway to encourage
people to support it. Funny that the only JEPs I seem to be in charge of
are ones I don't support yet :)

The major question is how we get all of these rosters switched from % --
maybe the transports could accept both % and whatever new character(s)
they decide on? Transport authors? comments?

Julian
-- 
email: julian at jabber.org
jabber:julian at jabber.org




More information about the Standards mailing list