On 12/8/09 6:32 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Erk, you got your top posting in our bottom posting. :)
> 
> On 12/8/09 4:20 PM, Douglas Abbink wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Matthew Wild <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>     2009/12/8 Matthew A. Miller <[email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>>     > Today, XEP-0124 includes a way to report the highest supported
>>     version, but XEP-0206 (XMPP over BOSH for the uninitiated) does not.
>>
>>     Supported version of what? XMPP or BOSH?
>>
>>     >  We're finding this problematic in implementing client- and
>>     server-side, since it's not clear when a stream restart should or
>>     should not be sent.  The current version of the spec says MUST, yet
>>     this change came after draft acceptance, so any implementation
>>     against previous versions (which were SHOULDs) may not properly
>>     support this.
>>     >
>>     > I propose that we enhance XEP-0206 to include an xmpp:ver or
>>     xmpp:rev to indicate the highest version/revision of support,
>>     similar to XEP-0124.
>>     >
>>
>>     It already includes an xmpp:version attribute, equivalent to the
>>     'version' attribute defined in RFC3920.
>>
>>     If you mean the BOSH version then yes, this does seem absent from 206,
>>     but note that 206 *extends* 124, which does define a 'version'
>>     attribute in the session creation/response. This is a part of the BOSH
>>     protocol, and should be there whether using 124 with some other
>>     protocol, or with XMPP (as defined in 206).
>>
>>     Matthew.
>>
>> Although XEP-0206 extends XEP-0124, the versions of the 2 XEPs do not
>> track together.  For example, XEP-0206 is currently at version 1.2.  If
>> there was a change to 206 that bumped it to version 1.3 (that changed
>> protocol), there is no way for clients and servers to negotiate which
>> version of 206 to support based on the 124 version number (currently 1.8
>> I think).
>>
>> Thus, I believe Mr. Miller is suggesting a version number for XEP-206,
>> so that clients and servers can determine which bits of these two XEPs
>> each supports using different version numbers.
> 
> I see what you mean -- there's no easy way to determine if the other
> side supports the proper stream restart logic (since that was added in
> version 1.2 of XEP-0206), so we need to define a "version" attribute
> qualified by the "urn:xmpp:xbosh" namespace (or upgrade that namespace
> to use things like urn:xmpp:xbosh:1).

Well, already have a 'version' attribute qualified by the urn:xmpp:xbosh
namespace, which is used to signal the XMPP version supported. So we
need to define a different namespace, such as restartlogic='true' (with
a default to false) so that the connection manager can include that as a
kind of feature advertisement (at the xbosh level) when sending the
session creation response to the client.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to