[standards-jig] [jepnews] JEP-0020: Client Feature Negotiation

Casey Crabb debug at nafai.dyndns.org
Thu Feb 28 14:11:00 UTC 2002


I agree, there doesn't seem to be a need for an additional namespace for
functionality/feature support checking. We just have to be careful to
specify what the valid ``option"s are for for each namespace.

As a sort of tangent the list of namespaces and options would serve as a
nice guide for client developers if the namespaces and particular
options linked to the protocol documentation describing their
functionality and implementation details. This would provide client
developers a place to go for documented namespacces. It might be nice if
the developers could place notes on each namespace and option to help
with smaller implementation details (for example, how to properly use
the 'priority' tag of the presence element is not well documented. You
get pointed in the correct direction if you ask about it on jdev, but
its pretty hard to get out of the documentation how you're suppose to
treat it.)

-- 
Casey
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 02:40, Ashvil wrote:
> My two cents ...
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, Vista is the only client that currently does
> feature negotiation (we use this to find out what addons are installed) and
> we have been doing this with iq:browse for the last six months without any
> issues.
> 
> I am not sure why we we need a new feature negotiation namespace. I would
> love to know, why querying the existing namespaces was not considered.
> 
> We should be able to query the namespaces that the client returns to figure
> out what features it supports like this
> 
> <iq type='get' to='jid2'>
>     <query xmlns='namespace to be queried'>
>     </query>
> </iq>
> 
> To use the example in the JEP it would be ...
> 
> <iq type='get' to='jid2'>
>     <query xmlns='jabber:crypto:keyexchange'>
>     </query>
> </iq>
> 
> <iq type='result' to='jid2'>
>     <query xmlns='jabber:crypto:keyexchange'>
>             <options>
>                 <option>diffie-hellman</option>
>                 <option>pgp</option>
>             </options>
>     </query>
> </iq>
> 
> I think the above is more in line with the Jabber protocol as I understand
> it.
> 
> Regards,
> Ashvil
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter at jabber.org>
> To: <standards-jig at jabber.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 5:56 AM
> Subject: [standards-jig] [jepnews] JEP-0020: Client Feature Negotiation
> 
> 
> > Peter Millard has put together a standards-track JEP regarding negotiation
> > of features between clients. Here is the URL:
> >
> > http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0020.html
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --
> > Peter Saint-Andre
> > email+jabber: stpeter at jabber.org
> > web: http://www.saint-andre.com/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Standards-JIG mailing list
> > Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig





More information about the Standards mailing list