[Standards] Domain & JID Aliasing

Matthias Wimmer m at tthias.eu
Thu Feb 1 23:04:15 UTC 2007

Hi Tim!

Tim Brennan schrieb:
> ----- "Matthias Wimmer" <m at tthias.eu> wrote:
>> So we may have to define it differently. But still I think redirecting
>> is the correct way to go. Everything else will cause to much damage on
>> protocols that have JIDs inside the stanza.
> Are there many such cases where the JID is embedded in the protocol (not in the to/from) and needs to be rewritten?  If it were common, then clearly rewriting is a nonstarter.  I can't think of any examples, but I am far from an expert.

Yeah, we already have several of them. I don't want to check every XEP, 
but what comes to my mind is e.g. multi user conferencing (access 
rights, invitations, checking the identity for someone, ...).

But even if we would not have a current protocol, we should care about 
what happens in the future. If we break it now, it will cause harm on 
any future protocol, that has to embed JIDs. It's like with NAT where 
new protocols often have problems to work through and many hacks have to 
be done to pass them. Just think about all the trouble we already had 
with file transfers because of NAT.

Well I can't stop someone implementing rewriting in its server (and I 
even do not want to). But the XSF should not bless this behaviour by 
writing a HOWTO XEP for it, but instead work on a standard for a 
future-safe way of doing it.

Tot kijk

Matthias Wimmer      Fon +49-700 77 00 77 70
Züricher Str. 243    Fax +49-89 95 89 91 56
81476 München        http://ma.tthias.eu/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4263 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070202/db2db488/attachment.bin>

More information about the Standards mailing list