[Standards-JIG] iq for ibb
Lukáš 'Spike' Polívka
lukas.polivka at gmail.com
Wed Dec 6 19:35:08 UTC 2006
On 12/6/06, Justin Karneges <justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 December 2006 1:29 pm, Maciek Niedzielski wrote:
> > > Since iq has also been introduced for ibb recently
> > > (http://www.jabberstudio.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/cvs/xmpp/extensions/xep-
> > >0047.xml?r1=1.2&r2=1.4), is there any way for client to declare that they
> > > prefer or support one over other ? None of the older clients are going to
> > > understand iq ibb stanzas for example : same for servers.
> > I'd suggest adding disco features:
> > <feature var="http://jabber.org/protocol/ibb#message-transport" />
> > <feature var="http://jabber.org/protocol/ibb#iq-transport" />
> > Plus make message transport a MUST requirement, so older implementations
> > can blindly send messages without checking peer's features.
> I vote for using disco. This is actually how UDP support in XEP-65 works.
> Base support means TCP only, and there's an extra #udp namespace if you
> support UDP.
> We can do the same thing here, with an extra #iq namespace. I wouldn't worry
> about announcing message support, that is already implied by the base
> Sorry about not including this in the first place. The only reason I didn't
> is because I didn't think anyone was actually using IBB.
AFAIK Bombus (mobile client) development version is now supposed to
have some IBB support.
IM (XMPP/Jabber/Google Talk): spike411 at jabber.cz
ICQ, AIM, MSN: Never ever!
More information about the Standards