[Standards-JIG] Historical XEPs

Mridul mridul at sun.com
Fri Nov 17 14:06:44 UTC 2006


Hi Matthias,

  What is the benefit we get out of deprecating component protocol ?
We already have two namespaces to juggle with - server and client, so 
one more is not really a huge burden.
I like the idea of using SASL instead of the current custom 'way' to do 
things - but supporting TLS does not really require too much of an effort.
We could always add support to the component protocol and allow sasl 
mechanism's there.

S2S connections are already special cased in a lot of ways (tls + 
auth/dialback + multiple inbound/outbound streams) and I would rather 
not expose that kind of complexity to a component.
They are just specialized 'client type' connections who have privileged 
access to the server through a shared secret and different namespace..

Regards,
Mridul

Matthias Wimmer wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
>   
>> - Component Protocol
>>     
>
> I think the component protocol should get deprecated as well. What is
> really bad with this protocol is that it introduces yet another
> namespace where the stanzas can be in.
> Having different namespaces on different links requires quite some
> namespace changes to be done in the server. It really like to stop
> having the "jabber:component:accept" namespace.
>
> I'd propose, that components could just use s2s-type connections using
> SASL authentication to connect to the server.
>
>
> Tot kijk
>     Matthias
>
>   




More information about the Standards mailing list