[Standards] Re: compliance levels for 2008
stpeter at jabber.org
Mon May 7 18:54:26 UTC 2007
Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL J9935 wrote:
> Perhaps that is too strict of a definition of a server. Users don't
> care how muc is implemented just so long as their "xmpp server"
> supports it. So if you look at server more as an entity not as a
> single piece of software then it makes sense to mandate muc for
> intermediate server especially since intermediate client requires
Implementation is different from deployment. Compliance levels are for
software implementations, not service deployments.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards