[Standards] RFC 6120 vs. XEP

Ralph Meijer ralphm at ik.nu
Tue Feb 7 13:04:59 UTC 2017


On 07-02-17 13:41, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 04:46:58PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> RFC 6120 author here. :-)
>
> Great! :-)
>
>> Note that the order of features matters. In the Bind2 proposal, the order is
>> this:
>
> I have to disagree. RFC 6120, section 4.3.2 says this, though it is
> marked as an Implementation Note:
>
>> Implementation Note: The order of child elements contained in any
>> given <features/> element is not significant.
>
> Thus, I'm not really sure whether I agree with your understanding of RFC
> 6120's text.

I don't see why this is a debate at all. The order isn't even relevant. 
A client that understands Bind2 can simply see the feature appearing 
next to the RFC 6120 one, and choose to negotiate it instead of that.

A protocol is an agreement on how to do things. The agreement here is to 
bind a resource *instead of the original way*. If the server advertises 
it and the client uses it, you're done.

-- 
ralphm



More information about the Standards mailing list