[Standards] IBB revisions

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Sat Feb 21 22:14:01 UTC 2009

Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Thursday 19 February 2009 18:47:28 Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> As promised at the XMPP Summit, I've been working on some revisions to
>> XEP-0047 (In-Band Bytestreams). The changes consist of clarifying packet
>> processing and error handling, adding more examples, recommending IQs
>> over messages, correcting the schemas, etc. You can review the changes
>> in process here:
>> http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0047-1.2.html
> Nice modernization. :)

Heh, thanks.

> There's no explanation about how to use <message>.  It looks like the example 
> usage was removed.

Yes, I think we at least need to document that, even if we don't
encourage it. I'll add it back, perhaps in a separate section.

> "If enabled by the application that uses IBB, the parties MAY negotiate 
> multiple SessionIDs for the same bytestream, however such methods are out of 
> scope for this specification."  Would these really be multiple sessionIDs for 
> the same bytestream, or simply multiple bytestreams?  I get that this text is 
> to allow/warn for XEP-261, but I'm not sure if it is right or needed.

Hmm. If we consider a bytestream to be defined as a serious of data
packets that all use the same sid, then I think these would in fact be
separate bytestreams. Will fix.

> Also, some typos:
>   "Because IBB provides a generic bytestream, so its usage is open-ended."
>   "(which SHOULD math the NMTOKEN datatype)"

Will fix.


Peter Saint-Andre

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 6751 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20090221/e86533a1/attachment.bin>

More information about the Standards mailing list