Hello, I apologize for the lag. I have been away on vacation. All I really want is for authorization of a topic to apply to any full JID associated with an authorized bare JID. The notifications should only go to resources that have explicitly subscribed using their full JID.
For example, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is authorized to a topic. I don't want the publisher to have to authorize [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource1 or [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource2 thereafter. However, suppose [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource2 has not subscribed to the topic. That resource should not receive a notification. It is my understanding that the current authorization mode requires the publisher to manually authorize each resource individually. On Nov 12, 2007 7:55 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alexey Nezhdanov wrote: > > On Friday 09 November 2007 23:54:03 Lindsay Oproman wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have a question about subscription authorization that I was hoping > >> someone on this list might be able to help me with. I didn't see > >> anything in the documentation that answers my question. This may be > >> because I am new to XMPP and do not fully understand how resources are > >> treated by the server. > >> > >> Essentially, what I'm trying to do is have notifications sent to *all* > >> FULL JIDs of a subscriber upon publication. For example, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> subscribes to a topic. Something is then published to that topic. I > >> want a notification to go to both [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceA and > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceB... not just the primary entity (whatever that > >> may be). > >> > >> So, I figure one way to do this is to have [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceA and > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceB both explicitly subscribe to the topic (using > >> their full JID). However, this is where my question regarding > >> authorization comes in. If [EMAIL PROTECTED] is white listed, will > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceA and [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceB be granted > >> access > >> all the same? Alternatively, if the topic is using authorization > >> access mode, if authorization is granted to [EMAIL PROTECTED], will > >> individual authorization still need to be granted to both > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceA and [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resourceB? > > In the 6.1.1 it is explicitly mentioned that you can subscribe either an > > individual resource or a bare jid. > > > > You see - pubsub component generally do not knows what resources are online > > at > > the moment - so it just can't guess where to send updates. If you are > > subscribed by the bare jid - it will send update to it and _your_ server > > will > > take care of delivery. > > > > Most servers deliver <message/>s only to one resource - so most often it > > will > > be the case. However the RFC leaves it to the server's discretion - i.e. > > server MAY distribute it to one or all resources. > > So I can make a conclusion that deliver of updates to the bare jid is > > 1) server-specific > > 2) question of _your_ server configuration > > Hi Alexey, > > Everything you say is true. > > I suppose the question for Lindsay is, which of the follwoing do you want? > > 1. Receive every message at every resource > > 2. Receive every pubsub notifications at every resource > > 3. Receive some pubsub notifications at every resource > > I can understand why you might want any of these, although #2 seems less > interesting to me. In any case, as Alexey says, #1 is handled by your > XMPP server. #2 is handled by the pubsub service as a node-specific > configuration option controlled by the node owner. #3 is handled by the > pubsub service as a subscription-specific configuration option > controlled by the subscriber. > > We have not yet defined the configuration options to enable #2 and #3, > but we can define those options in the relevant FORM_TYPEs if there is > interest in this functionality. > > Peter > > -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ > >
