[Standards] XEP-283

tpatnoe tory.patnoe at webex.com
Mon Jan 31 15:58:24 UTC 2011


On 1/30/11 20:26, "Evgeniy Khramtsov" <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:

> 31.01.2011 08:52, tpatnoe wrote:
>> Our team is starting work on using XEP-283. Has anyone else looked at this
>> and do they see any problems with the spec as it is currently written
>> (Version 1.0)?
>> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0283.html
>> One item which came up in our discussion, is linking an unsubscribe from an
>> old JID to a new subscribe from the new JID with a token. However, we
>> decided that just including the new JID in the unsubscribe from the old JID,
>> and the old JID in a subscribe from the new JID were enough. A token
>> provided no more assurance of authenticity.
> What I really don't like in this XEP is that it contradicts the idea of
> "keep clients simple". I think we can do the same using server-side
> redirects (we have such error type already defined in the core RFC). In
> that case a client just need to set a redirect and his/her contacts
> should process presence redirects correctly. Also, redirects can be used
> for temporary migration and not only for account removal.

I believe you are referring to the stanza level error "gone" in section of RFC-3920bis. We may be using that error too. We wanted to do
actions pro-actively before waiting for a stanza sent from a contact.

-- Tory

More information about the Standards mailing list