[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0186 (Invisible Command)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Jan 31 15:38:46 UTC 2007


Remko Tronçon wrote:
>> I notice that the security considerations here violate the requirement
>> in RFC 3920 to reply to IQs of type get or set. We need to figure that
>> out.
> 
> Let the server reply to IQs on behalf of the client, as it would when
> it were offline?

Yes, I realized that in the middle of the night. :-) If the client is in 
invisible mode, the server replies to IQ set or get on the client's 
behalf. But I guess maybe it needs to make an exception if the client 
sent directed presence? E.g., Jingle uses all IQs and it wouldn't work 
if you were in invisible mode. Hmmm.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070131/0a7d0292/attachment.bin>


More information about the Standards mailing list