[Standards] MIX (XEP-0369) post-summit update to 0.8
jonas at wielicki.name
Thu Feb 16 19:32:47 UTC 2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 18:11:58 CET Georg Lukas wrote:
> I'm still confused about how MIX and MAM are going to interact in
> practice. While the concept is clear, I still wonder:
> - whether the participant's server, the MIX channel or both need to keep
> MAM archives of a channel (or only of individual nodes)
I think § 6.4 is clear on that: "All messages sent to a MIX channel MUST be
archived using MAM in association with the MIX channel. All messages MUST also
be archived on the server associated with each channel participant receiving
the message, which enables clients to always retrieve messages from the
clients MAM archive."
- From that it sounds like "both".
> - where a re-connecting client should direct MAM queries to for a
> - where a newly-joining client should direct MAM queries to, to obtain
> pre-join history.
Those should be clear in that case, right? (quick sync with local server, pre-
join from MIX service, as local server won’t have the history)
> * Steve Kille <steve.kille at isode.com> [2017-02-13 12:55]:
> > 8. Use example JIDs aligned to anticipated BIND2 format. These are
> > long!
> I think it's a bad idea to do this in examples for developers. It is
> hard enough already to remember the bare JIDs of multiple parties and
> their interactions, having the additional burden of mapping 256 bits of
> pseudo-randomness to individual clients is really counterproductive.
> Examples should be readable first, and there is really no need to have
> UUID/UUIDs in them.
As someone reading the MIX specification for the first time in full, I agree.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Standards