[Standards] NEW: XEP-0225 (Component Connections)

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Fri Aug 10 04:01:21 UTC 2007


On Thursday 09 August 2007 8:03 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Hi Matthias! :)
>
> Matthias Wimmer wrote:
> > Hi Peter!
> >
> > Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
> >> I don't have a strong preference really. A component feels a bit more
> >> like a client because it is a local connection, plus c2s connections are
> >> simpler than s2s connections. Let's pick one and be done with it. :)
> >
> > The reason why I for the most part suggest using jabber:server instead
> > of jabber:client is, that in the jabber:client namespace the from
> > attribute on stanza is optional, while on jabber:server it is not. I
> > think this is one of the biggest differences between these two
> > namespaces.
>
> In fact I think it's the only difference. ;-)

There's an even bigger one: server connections can only send stanzas in one 
direction.  Although that's more of a protocol thing than a schema thing, if 
you want to get picky. :)

> As I said, I think there are reasons to go with either jabber:client or
> jabber:server. It may more more a matter of picking one than choosing
> based on some reasoning.

I always figured components were more like clients than servers.  Clients and 
components make single outbound connections, and construct and parse stanzas 
for server routing.  In contrast, servers do very little stanza manipulation 
(and, depending on how your server is designed, even the roster stuff might 
be in a component).  It is stanza manipulation that really kicks your ass 
when it comes to the different namespaces, and so sharing the same one as 
clients would be useful I think.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list