[Standards-JIG] Re: Whose avatar?

Tijl Houtbeckers thoutbeckers at splendo.com
Tue May 24 16:59:47 UTC 2005


On Sun, 22 May 2005 20:57:13 +0200, Magnus Henoch <mange at freemail.hu>  
wrote:

> Magnus Henoch <mange at freemail.hu> writes:
>
>> I could keep the mapping between JIDs and avatar pubsub nodes in
>> private XML storage, updating it as I subscribe to new avatars.
>
> I found some more time to hack avatars, which has led me to think
> about this approach again.  I imagine something like the following:
>
> <iq type='set'>
>   <query xmlns='jabber:iq:private'>
>     <mappings xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub-mapping'>
>       <mapping user='juliet at capulet.com'
> 	       jid='pubsub.capulet.com'
> 	       node='juliet/geoloc'
> 	       targetns='http://jabber.org/protocol/geoloc'/>
>     </mappings>
>   </query>
> </iq>
>
> with any number of <mapping/> nodes under <mappings/>.  It's
> inconvenient that you can't use a delta to update this, but at least
> it gets the work done without changes to server implementations.
>
> This would be common to all clients that use data received from
> pubsub.  What do you think about it?

This would lead to sending (potentially) huge XML fragments to the server,  
for just adding 1 new person with an avatar or a "current song playing"  
etc. feature. However it's the only thing so far to provide secure pubsub  
events shared across multiple clients. Maybe you can at least split it up  
on a per namespace basis (perhaps using the fragment part of the uri of  
the namespace)?

It surprises me none of the JEP-0060 authors are replying (or those of  
JEPs depending on it, like 0084 and 0118). At least a security  
consideration could be added to them.

Anyway, Magnus, if you use this in your client it look secure to me,  
provided the problem of deleted pubsub nodes is taken care of.



More information about the Standards mailing list