[Standards-JIG] JEP 60: Requesting Items for a Node

Ralph Meijer jabber.org at ralphm.ik.nu
Tue May 31 11:25:42 UTC 2005


On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 02:41:28PM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 05:21:19PM -0600, Peter Millard wrote:
> > On 5/20/05, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> wrote:
> > > I think it would be reasonable for a pubsub service to consider owners
> > > and publishers to have "super-user" status and to allow JIDs with those
> > > affiliations to retrieve items.
> > > 
> > > If Peter and Ralph don't have any objections, I will add a note about
> > > that.
> > 
> > I think this is reasonable for owners, but not publishers (as has
> > already been noted).
>
> SHOULD for owners and MAY for publishers, or just remain silent about
> publishers?

SHOULD for owners is ok. I mean, owners could otherwise simply subscribe
and authorize themselves.

I would say publishers may only retrieve items they published, for other
items they MUST subscribe if the pubsub#publish_model is not 'open'.
Note that subscription and affilation are orthogonal and fetching items
is really linked to that right now.

> I agree that making SubIDs mandatory for all subscriptions seems
> unnecessary -- many deployments won't need them because they'll 
> disallow multiple subscriptions per JID or, more generally, the 
> whole concept of subscription options.

I also do not want SubIDs mandatory for reasons mentioned by the Peters.
There should be no problem on the server side, because this is a
discoverable feature. The specification is not clear on what clients
have to implement, but if a client doesn't know about subscription
identifiers, it would usually only try to subscribe once. I suppose
client SHOULD implement handing SubIDs, but it doesn't make any sense
in controlled environments.

-- 
Groetjes,

ralphm



More information about the Standards mailing list