[standards-jig] Version 0.5 of JEP-0045

Iain Shigeoka iain.shigeoka at messaginglogic.com
Mon Sep 23 17:07:18 UTC 2002

On 9/21/02 10:22 PM, "David Sutton" <jabber at dsutton.legend.uk.com> wrote:

> 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

I tend to agree. Mtr speaks eloquently on the problems introduced by
following Postel's law to excess (see www.beepcore.org and the discussions
on BEEP's design). At our current stage of development, I would prefer
servers to be strict (conservative in both what you accept and send) in
order to ensure protocols aren't "abused".


More information about the Standards mailing list