[Standards] deprecating in-band registration

Joachim Lindborg joachim.lindborg at sust.se
Wed Apr 2 06:50:51 UTC 2014

I'm all +++ better to have live things that is adapting, rather than having
to squeeze in new technology in old footprints.

Joachim Lindborg
CTO, systems architect

Sustainable Innovation  SUST.se
Barnhusgatan 3 111 23 Stockholm
Email: Joachim.lindborg at sust.se
linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/joachimlindborg
Tel +46 706-442270

2014-04-02 8:23 GMT+02:00 Steffen Larsen <zooldk at gmail.com>:

> Hi Peter,
> Provisioning or re-provisioning (buy/sell devices) “accounts” for IoT and
> M2M is actually one of the biggest “problems” / issues. So I think, that
> rethinking this problem will be the the best solution.
> -Just my 50 cent
> /Steffen
> On 02 Apr 2014, at 05:01, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> > Several folks have commented on in-band registration (IBR, XEP-0077)
> recently, wondering aloud whether we really want to recommend it for things
> like registering devices in IoT environments.
> >
> > I agree with the concerns that people have expressed. I suggest that we
> push this line of thinking to its logical conclusion and strongly consider
> deprecating and then obsoleting IBR. Perhaps - perhaps! - IBR was
> appropriate in 1999 when we were trying to encourage people to easily try
> out this new technology called Jabber. Those days are long gone.
> >
> > If we feel that we'd like to have some kind of method for account
> provisioning over XMPP - and I'm not convinced that we do - then I feel
> that we need to rethink the whole problem, not reuse something that is
> fundamentally flawed.
> >
> > Peter
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20140402/8c15e1cc/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list