[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Remote Authentication
stpeter at stpeter.im
Thu Dec 2 15:15:14 UTC 2010
On 12/2/10 8:12 AM, Kim Alvefur wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 07:58 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I wonder: can that model be generalized to other extensions? (Think
>> pubsub, gateways, etc.)
>>> 4. The error condition is 'sasl-required'. Does this imply that
>> normal MUC password auth should fail, even with a correct password?
>> What do you think?
>> Because legacy MUC passwords are sent in the clear, a given MUC
>> service might not want to accept that other method, but in practice I
>> think they would for quite a while.
> How about something new instead of `<feature
> var='muc_passwordprotected'/>' to advertise SASL support.
Yep, we need that. How about 'urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-sasl'? If that
is not specific enough, we could define urn:xmpp:remote-auth as a
feature (but not an XML namespace).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 6105 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Standards