[Standards] RFC 6120 vs. XEP

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Tue Feb 7 15:47:59 UTC 2017


On 2/7/17 8:15 AM, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote:
> Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:04:59 +0100
> Ralph Meijer <ralphm at ik.nu> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> The problem is, formally speaking, it cannot ignore RFC's binding,
> because there are MUSTs in the document (Marvin already listed them).

A client needs to bind a resource. RFC 6120 does not and cannot forbid 
anyone from defining and experimenting with an alternative binding 
mechanism (among other things, this is why we use namespaces). If those 
experiments lead to improved functionality, then we'll consider porting 
Bind2 to rfc6120bis. There are no protocol police and I'm not sure why 
we'd want them to shut down useful experiments.

Peter




More information about the Standards mailing list