To my mind, what you call "the resource system" is an addressing scheme. Are you proposing that we throw out the resource part of a Jabber ID?
Just curious. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre email+jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] weblog: http://www.saint-andre.com/blog/ On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Dave wrote: > Maybe we should consider tossing the "resource" system, and replacing it with a >pub/sub architecture; that'll allow individual users to define the answers to all the >questions below, rather than having an increasingly complex protocol dictate answers >that may be somewhat less than perfectly apparent even to people as intelligent and >well-versed in Jabber as Mr. Waite (obviously much less apparent to your average Joe >using Jabber as a simple IM system - myself, for instance). > > To the best of my knowledge, there's no requirement for JNG to be compatible with >the current Jabber protocol, so we should be able to pull off the switch at this >point. In the long run, I believe we'll find that the work to overhaul the whole >basic Jabber protocol will have been well worthwhile. (In fact, I'd be willing to >rewrite any part of the OSS Jabber server that nobody else wants to - I have a fair >amount of free time that I spend coding my Jabber proxy server (and reading most of >the Jabber and IPv6-related mailing lists) that I wouldn't mind reallocating to work >on rewriting parts of jabberd, if that's what it takes to get the Jabber protocol >refocused on a fundamental architecture that'll give us a tremendous amount of power >in the messaging and presence management worlds, as well as a concrete base on which >media delivery systems can be built with relative ease.) > > Dave Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > David Waite wrote: > > > > Here's a couple of the questions I'm wondering > > > > - What is the behavior when a lower-priority resource changes presence? > > - What is the behavior when a lower-priority resource changes to the > > highest priority, or vice-versa? (keep in mind that some clients change > > priority when they go auto-away, and any presence change within a > > priority level makes that client have the highest priority) > > - What is the behavior when the highest-priority resource logs out? (I'm > > assuming a lower-priority resource is ignored) > > - How should invisible mode interact, in both the case where the remote > > system does and does not support invisible mode? > > - What is the correct behavior when a message is sent from a resource > > which is not the highest priority? Do responses get sent to a different > > client (and how would that happen)? > > > > -David Waite > > > > _______________________________________________ > > jdev mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > > > > _______________________________________________ > jdev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev > _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
