[Standards] [Fwd: [Council] meeting minutes, 2007-05-16]

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Wed May 30 08:06:22 UTC 2007

We already have a solution which solves a problem very much like this  
(indeed, it could just about be used to address this, although it has  

Currently you can add a privacy list which denies iq for contacts  
with subscription 'none'.

I don't think it would be too onerous to add a protocol which drops  
iq to full jids for contacts with subscription 'none', and I think  
this would address all camps' issues. It maintains the resource,  
which some of us would still have trouble living without (I need to  
know what each of my resources is, for example, some of which may be  
in the same room and online at once with the same client version etc,  
possibly even from the same PC. It's opaque in the same way as the  
user part of a jid is, but I still need to have set it (gtalk's  
method works well here, they get the random resources that make  
server farming easier, and I still get immediately identifiable  
resources)) while ensuring that presence isn't leaked by different  
replies to iq from server and client, etc.

To my eye, this seems like a really clean solution, doesn't break  
what we already have (although you may feel it needs to be broken),  
and solves the leak problem.

Kevin Smith
Psi XMPP Client Project Leader (http://psi-im.org)

More information about the Standards mailing list