[Standards] RFC vs privacy lists

Florian Zeitz florian.zeitz at gmx.de
Wed Apr 27 21:43:55 UTC 2011

Am 27.04.2011 23:28, schrieb Yann Leboulanger:
> On 04/27/2011 10:42 PM, Remko Tronçon wrote:
>>> So a client is not allowed to send an iq to its server if this anti-spam
>>> rule is set?
>> I'm not quite following why it's not ok to send an iq to your own server?
>> The XEP says that privacy lists block *incoming* IQs (that is,
>> 'incoming' from the point of view of the client, so from other
>> entities on the network than your client). It should be ok to send IQ
>> requests to anywhere you like. If your server blocks IQs you are
>> sending, something sounds wrong with that server (as this is about
>> *outgoing* IQs). And it's even worse if it's blocking outgoing IQs to
>> the server *itself* (like disco#info).
> No, the outgoing iq is not blocked, but the reply is.
> So a client sends an iq, but nver get an answer, which is against the RFC.
As you pointed out yourself, and as Remko has pointed out is defined in 
XEP-0016 on decent servers the client DOES get a reply. A 
service-unavailable reply, but still a reply.

You are in fact right that privacy lists allow you to shoot yourself in 
the foot in this regard. If you block all incommig IQs ALL of them are 
going to be blocked, including the ones from your server. If that's not 
what you want whitelist the server, I'm not really sure what the problem is.

More information about the Standards mailing list