[standards-jig] NEW JEP: Inband Bytestream (JEP-0047)
thoutbeckers at splendo.com
Mon Sep 30 11:46:16 UTC 2002
"Richard Dobson" <richard at dobson-i.net> wrote on 30-9-2002 13:33:36:
>> Bandwith usage is configurable on the server with Karma. If you give
>> serveradmins the ability to block the *standard* way of exchanging
>> inband data client will go around this and do it in non-standard ways
>> (eg stuffing it into a <message/>). Then we'll end up with no
>> standard again.
>That maybe the case, but server admins need the configurable ability to
>block inband client data if they want to, it cannot simply be forced on
All you can block is standardised inband data transfers. This means
I'll get blocked if I want to send a 400 byte big png file the standard
way, while my neighbour is stuffing a 10 meg MP3 file into a message
element. I don't see a point in that. If data traffic is a problem for
your server you should set tight Karma limits.
Ofcourse any server admin is allowed to block any kind of tag that is
send. You can block <message/> for all I care :) But I don't think it
should be made *too* easy for serveradmins, cause it cripples their
clients. Let alone that something about blocking inband should be in
the inband JEP. (if jabber:iq:inband is blocked it should discoverable
using disco on the server, just like any other namespace).
>Also if anyone goes non-standard then that is their look out, if
>they do they risk not being compatible with clients that do follow the
>standard (i.e. almost all) you will always get rogue people who want
>to do it their way, the problem at the moment is that there is no
>standard, thats why people are using all sorts of ways at the moment.
I think that if you put something in the JEP about how to explicitly
block inband transfers, and if it can be blocked by something simple on
the server like putting a <blockinband/> in jabber.xml it won't help
much in getting every client to use the same standard. I could be wrong
More information about the Standards