[Standards] RFC 6120 vs. XEP

Sam Whited sam at samwhited.com
Tue Feb 7 15:57:07 UTC 2017


On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is, formally speaking, it cannot ignore RFC's binding,
> because there are MUSTs in the document (Marvin already listed them).

Not at all; from 6120:

> Support for resource binding is REQUIRED in XMPP client and server implementations.

We're not violating this by introducing a new bind mechanism, you just
have to support the old one too (which you'd want to do anyways for
interoperability, as Peter said)

> After a client authenticates with a server, it MUST bind a specific resource to the stream so that the server can properly address the client.


And we're not violating this, because the client is still binding a
resource (just with a different mechanism, or possibly with the old
one still if it doesn't support the new one).


The rules for required stream features say that if multiple required
features are listed, the client picks between them. In this case,
clients that support it would simply pick the new bind mechanism and
6120 is perfectly satisfied.


—Sam


More information about the Standards mailing list