[Standards] CSI and Carbons state after SM resumption
flo at geekplace.eu
Sat Feb 11 20:39:43 UTC 2017
On 06.02.2017 10:31, Georg Lukas wrote:
> * Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> [2017-02-06 10:15]:
>>> Ah right, another unfortunate design decision.
>> Not at all; the nonzas are semantically correct here because it
>> doesn't make sense to have the CSI enable/disable "commands" be
> I principally agree with your point, and I'm not explicitly blaming CSI
> for using nonzas. On the other hand, nonzas were introduced in 0198 as a
> kind of meta-element that is required to count actual elements without
> interfering with them, and now CSI ended up (ab)using them as well.
> If I were going to redesign everything in XMPP, I'd probably
> differentiate between "stanzas" (routable elements), "nonzas" (non-
> routed elements between the user's client and their server; these
> could also be used for other XEPs like Carbons to avoid devs' security
> sloppyness), and "SM nonzas" which are the only ones explicitly excempt
> from XEP-0198 counters.
I would seriously consider this change if we ever do a version bump of
XEP-0198 Stream Management.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 603 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Standards