[standards-jig] Version 0.5 of JEP-0045

David Sutton jabber at dsutton.legend.uk.com
Sun Sep 22 05:22:43 UTC 2002


On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 06:37:57PM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, Mike Mintz wrote:
> 
> > Sorry if these comments have already been mentioned.
> > 
> > 1. Is there any reason for a user to define the type="groupchat" or 
> > type="chat" in outgoing messages?  The component just changes them to the 
> > appropriate type based in if there's a resource or not, so why should it be 
> > sent?
> 
> Postel's law: "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you
> send." It's not nice to force the component to change the message type.
>  
Personal feelings:

  Its good for the sake of clarity. Although, I might be in favour of
  the server checking the type. I can see how misdefining the type could
  be used maliciously in one case, or confusing in the other
  
> > 2. One should be able to ban based on more than just the JID.  A malicious 
> > user could write a jabber component to join the room numerous times with 
> > clones on the same domain (component.domain.tld) with different usernames.  
> > It should be allowed to ban an entire domain of users.
> 
> Out of scope for this JEP. See section 2 of version 0.6 for the scope.
> (Not that it isn't important.)
>
Well.... yes and no .. whats to stop a blocked jid being 
'component.domain.tld'? The 'user@' just narrows the number of matches a block 
would make.
>
Regards,

  David

-- 
David Sutton
Email: dsutton at legend.co.uk
Jabber: peregrine at legend.net.uk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20020922/1977a996/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list