What about XEP-156? For web-only clients that don't have DNS access,
they can usually have the polling URL configured in, and for desktop
clients, they can look up a TXT record to figure out where to poll.
Why do we have to hard-code a path?
On Oct 5, 2009, at 10:50 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 10/5/09 2:32 AM, Winfried Tilanus wrote:
On 10/05/2009 Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Hi,
The more I think about it, the more I like "/bosh" (especially given
that most BOSH CMs will be hosted at domains that are not serving
normal
web pages).
About what path are we talking here, the bosh path at the CM or the
bosh
path at the webserver serving the pages? These might be the same
(eJabberd for example incorporates a webserver) or these might be
different (for example a webserver like apache2 proxying to the CM).
I think primarily the bosh path at the CM.
For both the paths, standardization might make configuration
easier. So
I am in favour. But for sandboxed clients, there might by quite a big
site be hosted toghter with the CM or the proxy to the CM.
Yes, that is a possibility.
So I would
say: recommend both paths to /http-bind/.
Works for me -- I don't really care what we call it, so /http-bind
is fine.
Peter
- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkrKMdQACgkQNL8k5A2w/vxPnACfcgE3aHRj1b99XKlNQCLmd8A3
x2gAniQiVUD3X6l5I2wOcTdDS8vseY5w
=U84l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
