[Standards] Problems with IM Message Routing: Message Types

Georg Lukas georg at op-co.de
Sat Nov 11 10:44:21 UTC 2017

* Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> [2017-11-10 21:15]:
> I think there is even a XEP recommending sending to full jids.

Do you mean resource locking? As Kev said, we should probably get rid of
it for messages but possibly keep it for IQs.

> > https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XMPP_2.0)
> I always advocate simple solutions. (See my <transient/> proposal.)
> and this proposal is - in some ways - even simpler.
> I'm really not sure how the transition to 'XMPP 2.0' would look like thought.

This needs some more discussion indeed. The wiki page outlines a
kind-of-strawman proposal for a migration path, where message hints are
added/processed on the servers at the border of "XMPP 2.0" domains.

|| http://op-co.de ++  GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N  ++
|| gpg: 0x962FD2DE ||  o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+  ||
|| Ge0rG: euIRCnet ||  X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e++++ h- r++ y?   ||
++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_________________________________________________||
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20171111/92ce004d/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list