[standards-jig] RFC822 style JIDs

Joe Hildebrand JHildebrand at jabber.com
Wed Nov 13 19:19:19 UTC 2002


I actually use @ in resources quite frequently, more from server components
than user connections.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Karneges [mailto:justin-jdev at affinix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 9:03 PM
> To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [standards-jig] RFC822 style JIDs
> 
> 
> I agree with putting the same restrictions as the node to the 
> resource.  I 
> guess the question really, is are there any current implementations / 
> applications that utilize these characters we wish to restrict?
> 
> Personally, I've only witnessed these characters on rare 
> occasions.  I've seen 
> resources like "windows/home" or "Psi at work", but these are 
> hand crafted and 
> thus not a problem (future servers could deny these resources 
> with an error, 
> no change needed in the clients).
> 
> The only problematic resource I've seen is "Jabber Instant 
> Messenger", which 
> interestingly does not use any of the characters we are 
> discussing, but 
> instead uses spaces, which JEP-0029 does not allow.  That 
> considered, it is 
> arguably easier to put a restriction on " | & | ' | / | : | < 
> | > | @, since 
> nobody uses them.  Putting a restriction on spaces is going 
> to require a JIM 
> awareness campaign.
> 
> So maybe there could be a bigger debate about whether or not 
> resources should 
> be allowed to contain spaces.  After all, you might want a 
> space in your 
> groupchat nickname (at least moreso than any of these other 
> weird characters 
> we'd like to restrict).  One possibility is that the resource 
> could be 
> URL-encoded.  So a space would become %20.  Maybe the server 
> could do this 
> conversion on-the-fly as an optional transitional feature.
> 
> With that in mind, I think it should not be a problem at all 
> to add a few more 
> character restrictions to JEP-0029 and call it good.
> 
> -Justin
> 
> On Tuesday 12 November 2002 01:56 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Why not go all the way and apply the node identifier 
> restrictions to the
> > resource identifier? Then the following would be disallowed:
> >
> >    " | & | ' | / | : | < | > | @
> >
> > Those need to be escaped now, but would anyone be seriously 
> hindered if
> > they were disallowed?
> >
> > Since JEP-0029 is deferred, it's probably best to discuss 
> this on the
> > xmppwg list, but it can't hurt to find out what people's 
> feelings are
> > here.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --
> > Peter Saint-Andre
> > Jabber Software Foundation
> > http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Justin Karneges wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > JEP-0029 proposes a JID definition:
> > > http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0029.html
> > >
> > > Would it also be worthwhile to add additional restriction to the
> > > Resource, to exclude angle brackets?  This way, full JIDs could be
> > > represented in a simple, parsable, RFC822-style text format:
> > >
> > >   Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org/Work>
> > >
> > > Since Jabber is often attributed to email, it would be 
> nice if JIDs could
> > > be represented in the same way as an email address.
> > >
> > > -Justin
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
> 



More information about the Standards mailing list