[Standards] Suggestion for XEP-0045 : permit alias for the MUC address

Alexander Holler holler at ahsoftware.de
Sun Sep 25 09:34:01 UTC 2011

Am 24.09.2011 23:51, schrieb Waqas Hussain:
>> And handling room-aliases on the server side would have many pitfalls
>> (e.g.the delay elements in the history). I'm not sure where else room-JIDs
>> are used (besides in 'from'), that would require checking the whole XEP for
>> appearances of room-JIDs (which currently isn't that easy) ;)
> Kev is correct. MUC aliasing can work fine without any protocol or
> client changes. A server doesn't need to forbid letting a client enter
> a room in two ways. It would work fine. And I can't think of any
> pitfalls regarding the delay element.

The pitfall is that you can't stamp the delayed stanza when the delaying 
actually occurs, which means you have to do that somehow else. If you 
do, you will have to change that afterwards (when sending out). Stuff 
like this is what I call pitfalls.



More information about the Standards mailing list