On 2/28/08, Fabio Forno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Sergei Golovan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It could be true if XMPP were defined as a XML subset in a consistent
way (currently, XMPP doesn't require stream to be
namesapce-well-formed, but allows to use
2008/2/29, ramaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I am trying to get jabber client with audio/video chat.But unable
to get.
There are some free(neos jabber client) but not open source.
I need free and opensource jabber cleint with audio/video chat.
Any one have download
On 2/29/08, Norman Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The point is that:
stream:stream
xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams'
messagegajim:die//message
/stream
contains an unbound prefix 'gajim', so MUST be rejected by all XMPP
parsers.. If you want to send xml that looks
RFC 3920: 11.2, says xml-names is to be used,
xml-names, section: 4.1, Namespace Constraint: Prefix Declared, says:
The namespace prefix, unless it is xml or xmlns, must have been declared
in a namespace
declarationhttp://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114/#dt-NSDeclattribute
in
On 2/29/08, Norman Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RFC 3920: 11.2, says xml-names is to be used,
Does this mean XMPP stream MUST conform [XML‑NAMES]? I don't see that
strong statement.
So please go and log a bug against ejabberd.
If I were an ejabberd developer I'd reject this bugreport
Of interest regarding the IETF's experiment of allowing IPv6-only
connections during part of its upcoming meeting.
/psa
Original Message
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IETF discussion list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IPv6 @ IETF-71, especially Jabber
Date: Fri,
