In the case of a connected IM client the from MUST be fully qualified a per RFC3920 in order to conform with the delivery rules. This is not the case for entities that are not connected using the jabber:client namespace. In short, yes the protocol does not requires the full JID, but for a client it IS a full JID.
7. Resource Binding After SASL negotiation (Section 6) with the receiving entity, the initiating entity MAY want or need to bind a specific resource to that stream. In general this applies only to clients: in order to conform to the addressing format (Section 3) and stanza delivery rules (Section 10) specified herein, there MUST be a resource identifier associated with the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> of the client (which is either generated by the server or provided by the client application); this ensures that the address for use over that stream is a "full JID" of the form <[EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource>. -----Original Message----- From: Gary Burd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [jdev] googletalk To: Jabber software development list <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 1/30/06, Ben Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know google does an amount of strict checking, however i cannot figure out > what is wrong with the above message. > > Any ideas? What this is not: - Sender not on receipient's roster. The service does not return bad-request for this condition. - The from JID must be fully qualified. The XMPP protocol does not require this, nor does the service care. Possible problem: - Default namepsace not declared for the stream. It should be jabber:server.
