[Standards] MAM: misleading archiving node in examples

Ruslan N. Marchenko me at ruff.mobi
Tue Feb 21 21:31:19 UTC 2017

On 21.02.2017 22:00, Kim Alvefur wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:35:51PM +0100, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote:
>> If I understand it right - in absence of 'to' attribute on c2s - the server
>> itself is assumed as a recipient - i.e. <iq id='1'/> == <iq to='example.org'
>> id='1'/>.
> No, the current account is assumed, so ...
>> In MAM case archiving node for the user is user's bare jid - hence proper
>> addressing should be <iq to='user at example.org' id='1' type='set'>...</iq>
> ... this is equivalent.
> https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6120.html#rules-noto
>> If the server receives an IQ stanza with no 'to' attribute, it MUST
>> process the stanza on behalf of the account from which received the
>> stanza, [...]
Ops, ok, thanks for pointing out, now need to review if I messed it up 
in some recent implementations. *sigh*


More information about the Standards mailing list