[Standards] Per Channel Nicks vs Global Nicks

Steve Kille steve.kille at isode.com
Sun Jun 3 16:13:50 UTC 2018


Daniel,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Standards <standards-bounces at xmpp.org> On Behalf Of Daniel Gultsch
> Sent: 03 June 2018 08:29
> To: XMPP Standards <standards at xmpp.org>
> Subject: Re: [Standards] Another proposal - Handling JIDs for MIX-CORE, MIX-
> PRESENCE and MIX-PAM
> 
> 2018-06-03 1:33 GMT+02:00 Steve Kille <steve.kille at isode.com>:
> > (Nick and Bare JID).
> 
> I’m just on my way home from a very productive and interesting meetup with
> designers and artists. And without knowledge of the current MIX debate - just
> by analyzing the way Conversations currently implements group chats / MUC -
> people very quickly challenged the need for having per room nicks. And the very
> few arguments I was able to make in defense of having nicks in groups chats are
> only valid for anonymous groups.
> 
> Just wanting to put this out there…
> 
> cheers
> Daniel

[Steve Kille] 
Thanks 0 this is useful to share.

I can see that most users joining a public channel would want to use the same Nick for this and for all public interactions.

There is no global registry, where users can register Nicks.   I won't debate if this is good or bad.   However,  I think it means that channels (or MUC rooms) need to get users to pick a Nick.    I think it would be helpful for an XMPP client to make it easy to choose the same Nick for all channels.

We also see environments where service operators want to enforce consistent and sensible Nicks.

MIX has a concept of Nick Registration (now in MIX-MISC)  which provides a framework for users to have a single Nick across channels in a single domain.    This is clearly not a global Nick, but can help deployments where only one or a small number of MIX domains are used.



Steve




More information about the Standards mailing list