[Standards] Using route-able JIDs in MIX-CORE

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Mon Jun 4 13:49:13 UTC 2018


On 04.06.2018 08:54, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2018, at 17:27, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
>> 3.) IQ requests usually send to / received from
>> channel at mix.service/stable-participant-id/client-id
>>
>> To allow us to address a particular client for IQ exchange. (We could
>> add IQ semantics for channel at mix.service/stable-participant-id later on,
>> but I'm undecided yet if it is a good idea)
> 
> Why would we want iqs to full JID but not bare JID of a client?

Hard to say since we did not yet specify the semantic of an IQ send to
channel at mix.service/stable-participant-id. Is it an IQ send to the
groupchat-participant's account on the groupchat? Or is proxied by the
groupchat to the user's account on its home server?

>> Bonus points if:
>> <snip/>
>> - Messages send to channel at mix.serivce/stable-paticiapnt-id are send to
>> a participant (PMs, e.g. fan-out via carbons, most available resource, …
>> - Messages send to channel at mix.service/stable-participant-id/client-id
>> are send to single XMPP session of the participant identified by
>> client-id (IBB (?)).
> 
> Those two aren’t a bonus, because they break archiving and introduce the significant risk of subtle bugs (such as those we’ve already seen in the wild) in implementations.

I'm sorry I can't follow without a little bit more elaboration and context.

- Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 618 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20180604/27a46715/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list