[Standards] RFC 6120 vs. XEP
ralphm at ik.nu
Tue Feb 7 13:04:59 UTC 2017
On 07-02-17 13:41, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> 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
> 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.
More information about the Standards