[Standards] NEW: XEP-0279 (Server IP Check)

Matthew Wild mwild1 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 7 15:20:26 UTC 2010


On 7 March 2010 10:42, Evgeniy Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthew Wild wrote:
>>
>> People want this, it's trivial to do, we should
>> standardize a way of doing it. Done.
>>
>
> Actually there is already a standard for address discovery - STUN.

STUN != XMPP.

> By the
> way, you didn't tell why this XEP is useful and why it is better than STUN,
> or when to use this XEP and when to use STUN.

I don't necessarily want STUN support - it does more than I need. My
server may not support it, whatever, I don't care.

>> Now this XEP isn't telling people not to use STUN, TURN, UDP or
>> Jingle... it's for the people who don't want or need to use those
>> technologies (perhaps for the moment).
>
> This XEP adds incomprehension: a Jabber developer might be confused which
> approach to choose: this XEP or STUN.

I highly doubt that - STUN is referenced explicitly in the XEPs that require it.

>>
>> I don't feel we should be
>> limiting what people want to do with XMPP, or how they should build
>> their applications
>
> Agreed. But I think we need to use a common well-tested solution, and not
> invent our own without necessity, if possible.
>

A simple request/response protocol is hardly "inventing our own".

> BTW, STUN has a protection from poorly written ALGs which rewrite IP
> addresses, that's why MAPPED-ADDRESS is now deprecated in favor of
> XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS. This XEP doesn't have such protection.
>

Indeed, and I argue that it shouldn't.

Matthew



More information about the Standards mailing list