[Standards] XEP-0297 review

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Jul 16 20:05:19 UTC 2012

On 7/16/12 1:29 PM, Matthew Wild wrote:
> On 16 July 2012 18:10, Justin Karneges
> <justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, July 16, 2012 09:53:02 AM you wrote:
>>> On 7/16/12 10:49 AM, Justin Karneges wrote:
>>>> On Monday, July 16, 2012 08:35:59 AM Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>>>> I've just reviewed XEP-0297 (Stanza Forwarding) and I think it looks
>>>>> good. One small comment, it would be good to describe briefly the kinds
>>>>> of extensions that might re-use this format, and specifically to cite
>>>>> draft-miller-xmpp-e2e.
>>>> I also wonder if we could restrict the namespace of the wrapped stanza to
>>>> always be "jabber:client".
>>> What if servers forward or encapsulate server-to-server stanzas? I could
>>> definitely see a use for that in debugging or incident reporting.
>> Then they'd be converted to "jabber:client" before encapsulation. I bring this
>> up because this is how the various e2e proposals have tended to work, and
>> ensures clients don't have to deal with multiple namespaces.
> This does make some sense. In Prosody a stanza is most of the time
> detached from its parent namespace, and in fact our MAM plugin already
> unconditionally sets jabber:client. I can't think of a case where you
> would need it to be jabber:server, even for the use-cases Peter
> brought up.

No strong objections here.

> I know top of my list for XMPP 2.0 (1.1??) would be a single namespace
> for all stream types :)

Of course, XMPP 2.0 would be JSON, so no namespaces required. ;-)


More information about the Standards mailing list