[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Extensible In-Band Registration
sam at samwhited.com
Mon Feb 13 22:00:09 UTC 2017
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't understand why we need to redefine how stream features work. My
> <command-nodes/> element with a list inside is the same as <mechanism/>
> element with a list of SASL methods inside. What's the difference?
Maybe you're right, I was thinking of all of the commands you listed
as different things, each with their own semantics and request/reply
payloads, but they are all things that could be done generally in the
same way; it's effectively a general "challenge" (form, POW, etc.)
I'll think about this more, but right now I think it's just scope
creep and not something I want to work on. If such a feature existed
already, I'd probably use it, but I'm not sure if I want to take the
diversion to write this XEP and then re-frame IBR in terms of it. I'll
think about it though; thanks for the suggestion!
> Also, yes, probably the XEP you're trying to write is not needed at all
> (or maybe it should be some informational best-practice XEP). What
> should be improved is XEP-0050.
Feel free to go work on 0050 if you think it needs work; I am working
on IBR right now though, and am not interested in changing priorities.
More information about the Standards