[standards-jig] Thoughts on JEP-0025 / Possible usage of JEP-0020
m at tthias.net
Mon Jun 10 18:48:13 UTC 2002
Mike Lin schrieb:
>I would like to ask you to see if you can use the JEP-0020 Feature
>Negotiation syntax for the HTTP Polling negotiation handshaking. I am
>very interested to have feedback on how it does or does not meet your
>requirements before voting on JEP-0020 as a Standards Track JEP in the
That's a good point. I havn't thought about the usage of JEP-0020
because I only thought of JEP-0020 as a protocol to negotiate features
between clients (or maybe between clients and servers). But it's true,
it has to be thought about if this protocol can be used at the
networking/connection layer too.
Some things where there would be (smaller) problems using JEP-0020 for
the http tunnel:
- To whom do I have to address the <iq/>s? The http polling server has
- When we do the negotiation there is no Jabber connection yet. We would
put the requests in a pseudo Jabber connection that is just used for
- More logic at the server side is required, it's not just sending a
static XML document.
- If the client sends the <iq/> the server will decide witch features
are used, what we
discussed until now was that the client decides.
- The server could not choose more then one feature, we would have to
send a request
for each type of feature (one of authentication methods, one for
session tracking methods, ...)
- With JEP-0020 we can't use one polling server to connect to different
There is now way the server could tell to which hosts he allows to
There is nothing like a <param/> tag for the <option/> tag.
One general thing to JEP-0020: I'm missing something like a version
attribute to the options. E.g. for "webdav" that's used as an example it
would be interesting to know which versions of webdav are
supported/which one is selected.
Fon: +49-700 77007770 http://matthias-wimmer.de/
Fax: +49-89 312 88654 jabber://firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the Standards