[Standards] [Operators] Future of XMPP Re: The Google issue

Evgeny Khramtsov xramtsov at gmail.com
Thu Dec 5 01:51:07 UTC 2013


Thu, 05 Dec 2013 01:05:50 +0100
Alexander Holler <holler at ahsoftware.de> wrote:

> Yes, they don't care, but a XMPP-server has to care about, as the
> server should refuse not-wellformed stanzas. So feeding it with the
> initial <stream:stream> might result in a problem (not hard to avoid,
> but still ugly).
> 
> Another ugly thing are those stream restarts, they don't fit very
> well into the XML syntax too:
> 
> "The initiating entity MUST send a new initial stream header to the 
> receiving entity over the encrypted connection (as specified under 
> Section 4.3.3, the initiating entity MUST NOT send a closing
> </stream> tag before sending the new initial stream header, since the
> receiving entity and initiating entity MUST consider the original
> stream to be replaced upon success of the TLS negotiation)."

That's XMPP as it is: if something can be done by hands it will be done
by hands :) There are no problems in XMPP. Oh wait... The only problem
is TLS in virtual hosting. Let's invent 3 specs to solve it :)



More information about the Standards mailing list