[Standards] Problems with IM Message Routing: Message Types

Georg Lukas georg at op-co.de
Sat Nov 11 12:02:36 UTC 2017


Kevin Smith <kevin.smith at isode.com>:

The only RFC6121 rule that needs to go is the re-routing of "chat"
messages sent to an unavailable full-JID: §8.5.3.2.1.
https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6121.html#rules-localpart-fulljid-nomatch


I think that if we start sending chat messages always to the bare JID,
we don’t even need this change, do we? Or are you thinking that
transient messages would still have type=‘chat’?


This is where we are mixing up message style and message routing again. Technically, the most fitting type for transient messages would be "headline". 

I could imagine a "workaround" where we forbid transient type=chat messages, because chat must be stored (or a similar excuse), but this is not a clean design, and it also ignores the implementations that reroute type=normal messages in violation of the RFC. 

Georg 
-- 
+++ Sent from Mobile +++ http://op-co.de/ +++


More information about the Standards mailing list