[standards-jig] JEP-0025

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Tue Feb 24 22:36:47 UTC 2004


On Tuesday 24 February 2004 1:44 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > I think that if JEP-25 is going to be replaced, we need to establish why
> > it should be replaced.  Judging by the discussion so far, it seems that
> > the rationale for JEP-124 is to provide an easier way for the second
> > group to implement XMPP over HTTP, not that there is any particular
> > deficiency in JEP-25.  This is not a good enough reason to replace the
> > JEP, in my opinion, especially if all it would do is reverse the
> > situation (second group happy, first group not happy).
>
> JEP-0025 has known deficiencies in the kinds of clients it can support.
> Plus that weirdness with the HTTP body has always bothered me. But I was
> mostly the scribe on JEP-0124, so others can probably explain things
> more fully.

Well, JEP-25 requires you to maintain the full xmpp-core state (xml parser, 
security layers, etc), just as if you were doing a plain TCP based 
connection.  There are probably some instances where this is not practical to 
do, such as two websites communicating with each other in a stateless way (as 
BartVB discussed some time ago), and possibly some other cases.

However, I don't expect JEP-124 to be popular among normal end-user IM 
clients.  JEP-124 is drastically different from xmpp-core, not end-to-end 
secure, and the only benefit it provides (which is the ability to work 
statelessly) is of no concern to these projects.

I'm not against JEP-124, and I'm aware of its usefulness.  Just remove the 
"Supercedes: JEP-25" text from JEP-124 and we'll all be happy.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list