[Standards] MIX Addressing
flo at geekplace.eu
Fri Jun 1 16:34:13 UTC 2018
On 01.06.2018 18:27, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 1 Jun 2018, at 17:19, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
>> On 01.06.2018 17:57, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 16:47, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
>>>> On 31.05.2018 13:45, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>>>> We’ve had some discussions recently about whether presence should come from the channel’s JID, the user’s proxy JID, or be encoded in pubsub. Similarly whether messages should be coming from the channel’s JID or the user’s proxy JID. I think the argument that things should come from the user’s in-channel JID rather than the channel’s is reasonable - this is also what happens already in MUC and is familiar.
>>>>> The reason for the proxy JIDs is that we need a stable identifier for the user in the channel,
>>>>> and we need it to be addressable per client.
>>>> Why was that again? Do we really need to encode four bits of information
>>>> in a single JID?
>>> IQs, mostly, they need to be address translated to the user’s full JID, which means encoding the full JID and the channel into the initial ‘to’.
>> But that only means you need a way to retrieve a JID which acts as proxy
>> JID for the user's real full JID. Not that MIX messages have to
>> originate from such an address. Right?
> Indeed, that’s exactly what option 4 is suggesting. Messages from the channel would come from channel at domain/user. There would also exist user#channel at domain(/resource) that can be used for directly routing stanzas (e.g. PM or iq).
In this case I would rather use channel at domain/user/resource for
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 618 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Standards