[Standards] RFC 6120 vs. XEP
dave at cridland.net
Tue Feb 7 21:22:17 UTC 2017
On 7 February 2017 at 16:29, Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Tue, 7 Feb 2017 19:18:39 +0300
> Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:57:07 -0600
>> Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> wrote:
>> > 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.
>> Indeed (section 4.3.2). Then we're ok here *if* we make Bind2
> For the record, it should be also pointed in XEP-0198 that <sm/>
> feature is mandatory to negotiate.
I'm missing something - why would <sm/> need to be mandatory to negotiate?
More information about the Standards