[Standards-JIG] JEP-0030 - Disco to resources

Ralph Meijer jabber.org at ralphm.ik.nu
Wed Apr 19 12:36:46 UTC 2006

On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 06:00:22PM +0530, Vinod Panicker wrote:
> On 4/19/06, Ralph Meijer <jabber.org at ralphm.ik.nu> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:06:49AM +0530, Vinod Panicker wrote:
> > > [..]
> > >
> > > Can anyone please point me to an instance where "connected" resources
> > > are being used for a practical purpose?
> >
> > I hope your question does not mean 'what is the point of having
> > clients that don't send presence'?
> Not at all.  Just trying to understand use cases for having connected
> and active states.

Will, for example I use a non-presence sending bot for conveying my
currently playing song using User Tune. This bot is constantly connected
but not 'available'.

> > That said, having disco#info on a bare (IM account) JID to return
> > resources that have not sent presence, will actually leak presence
> > information.
> Right. That means that modifying JEP-0030 to say that disco should be
> sent to only available resources would neither cause harm nor any dead
> kittens?

Why? I don't see a problem with people sending disco to
connected-but-not-available resources. If you already know it exists (by
having received a message from it, for example) there is no harm in
this. My point was that it shouldn't show up in the list of items that
are returned when doing disco#items to the bare JID.



More information about the Standards mailing list