[Standards] PR #793 - XEP-0166: Relax transport element requirement

Lance Stout lancestout at gmail.com
Wed Jul 10 19:16:33 UTC 2019


My review of the PR is that, although I agree entirely with the sentiment, this change would be breaking, and by itself is not worth the namespace fracturing.

Looking at Jingle code I currently have deployed in production systems, the expectation that a session or content accept action includes a transport element is present, and this change would trigger bad-request errors.

Generating and sending an “empty answer” transport element (for whatever an empty answer would look like for the transport in question) is the cleanest solution that still works in the existing namespace. I would prefer not sending the element at all, but again, not worth the namespace bump for such a minor detail.

/Lance



More information about the Standards mailing list