[Standards-JIG] proto-JEP: Smart Presence Distribution
fippo at goodadvice.pages.de
Wed May 17 16:52:44 UTC 2006
Jean-Louis Seguineau wrote:
>>which is what we do. We only use the roster instead of negotiating a
>>list. This assumes that the roster is synchronized between
>>the two servers of course.
> This 'of course' is the important bit, of course.
Of course it is ;-)
I was assuming that xmpp-im was taking care of that, but it seemingly
does not (e.g. what if a unsubscribed stanza bounces because a hostname
is temporarly unavailable).
include a 'roster serial', e.g.
<presence from='romeo at capulet/inlove>
<x xmlns='jabber:iq:roster:serial:whatever' version='2006051705'>
(serial format YYYYMMDD##)
That might also be handy for roster retrieval on c2s.
If the receiving server notices a serial mismatch a resync is
>>How are you going to negotiate that list without disclosing
>>parts of your privacy list to the remote server?
> By not including a particular address on the list for presence-out, and
> blocking for presence-in, why?
What I was talking about...
lets assume Romeo wants to send presence to everyone but Gregory using
's44sdasb4444dedd at multicast.capulet' as a relay.
How is he going to tell multicast.capulet to create a distribution list
that includes everyone on his roster less those people that are
on his presence-out list without telling multicast.capulet who is
on his presence-out list? (assuming that multicast.capulet is also
operated by the evil capulets who know who of the capulets is on romeos
On the other hand, the evil capulets can already guess that Romeo
has blocked Gregory if they see successive presence stanzas to
Juliet, Nurse, Peter, Sampson, Anthony and Potpan but not Gregory.
> I am just saying this breaks section 9.1.1 of RFC3920 for s2s
Yes, it does. It uses the semantics for c2s presence stanzas without
'to', i.e. "distribute it on my behalf".
Support for xmpp-heresy needs to be negotiated of course.
More information about the Standards