[Standards-JIG] Re: Groupchat using original jid's
stpeter at jabber.org
Mon Oct 25 22:44:27 UTC 2004
In article <36070.3911436305$1098732478 at news.gmane.org>,
Jens Mikkelsen <gyldenskjold at mail.dk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 20:54, Rachel Blackman wrote:
> > > Is there a standard for groupchat, where the group isn't administrated
> > > by the server or where the original jids are used?
> > MU-C in a non-anonymous room includes the real JIDs in the presence
> > packets. It is therefore possible to map the room-resource format
> > nicknames to the real JID.
> Hmmm... Ok. I haven't heard of the MU-C before. I have looked at
> jep-0045. To me it seems, that the server administrates this group,
> hence it could, if compromised, send the wrong JID's to the users.
> Thereby I had to trust the server, to be sure to get the right JIDs,
You can always run your own server + groupchat service. Jabber/XMPP is
not one centralized service like MSN or AIM.
> What I was looking for, was something where the client was an
> administrator and the server, was a dummy forwarding packages. Then I
> could digatally sign the messages and the user JIDs. I hope I am making
> my self clear.
The current model in Jabber/XMPP is for the groupchat service to
function as a dumb reflector but handle the room administration. This is
in keeping with the Jabber philosophy of keeping clients simple:
A better way to handle this would be for clients to sign messages and
presence sent through the room, as Justin mentioned.
More information about the Standards