[Standards-JIG] Re: Friendly Resource Names

Remko Troncon remko at el-tramo.be
Tue Oct 17 14:22:01 UTC 2006

> So the conclusion of your statement is that we should disallow the
> user from changing the resource field, replacing it with a UID, and

In an ideal situation, yes. You can already do this with XMPP1  
servers, by not providing a resource name upon resource binding (or  
in the case of GTalk, you always get a UID). There's one practical  
issue, though: when you get disconnected abruptly, and try to  
reconnect, you'll have two online resources, of which one is dead.  
Depending on whether or not clients send directed messages, depending  
on the delivery policy of your server to resources with equal  
priority, and depending on  whether you have stanza acking or not,  
messages might get lost without anyone knowing. This is why resource  
names are still useful at the moment: to ensure conflicts when you re- 
login, and to disconnect the other resource. Although there is  
probably a way to fix the situation with real UIDs in the protocol,  
letting the client use the machine name as a resource should be a  
good default for now.


More information about the Standards mailing list