On 12/7/05, Oscar Hellstr?m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > However, it seems the right thing to do is to push for clarification of > the involved JEP:s, to make them reflect what is really implemented (it > is an historical JEP isn't it). Then new clients, or clients who > develops avatar support, can do it according to the JEP and behave as > expected. agreed.
> Anyway, isn't it usually the server which stores the avatar > and calculates the hash? Or is the hash given to the server? I am not > talking about transports here. In that case, there aren't that many > implementations that can misbehave. I believe the avatar is stored on the server, but I think the presence avatar hashes are sent from the client. > I am one of those who don't believe in using my time make my > applications cope with misbehaving applications. agreed. -- - Norman Rasmussen - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/ From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 7 10:09:49 2005 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norman Rasmussen) Date: Wed Dec 7 10:09:54 2005 Subject: [py-transports] Installing PyAIM with Jabber2 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 12/7/05, Eric Langheinrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >This is the output from when you logged in using a client > >jabbberd/c2s. See if you can find some from the router: > >jabberd/router. > > After setting up a router log in router.xml, I see the following when I > start and stop PyAIMt > > Tue Dec 6 18:39:15 2005 [notice] [127.0.0.1, port=36236] connect > Tue Dec 6 18:39:52 2005 [notice] [127.0.0.1, port=36236] disconnect > Tue Dec 6 18:39:57 2005 [notice] [127.0.0.1, port=36237] connect > Tue Dec 6 18:46:48 2005 [notice] [127.0.0.1, port=36237] disconnect > Tue Dec 6 18:48:06 2005 [notice] [127.0.0.1, port=36247] connect hrm, so it's not even trying auth. > >> I'm a little confused about the aim gateway being resolved. But that > >>could just be my ignorance. > >That was because you logged in, it's trying to look for the aim > >gateway on your server, that's all good. > Should my client be able to talk to the aim gateway directly? Should it be > resolving using the gateway using DNS to the public IP of the server? the client won't connect directly to the gateway, no. The connection will be: client -> c2s -> router -> pyaimt. > >See if you can get a tcpdump of traffic on port 5347 on the localhost > >interface as you start the transport. > Using tcpdump I do see traffic for port 5347 on the lo interface. hrm, the traffic can be pretty noisy, can you isolate it to just the pyaimt conversation (i.e. wait for a quiet time) and see what's going on. what version of pyaimt are you using? -- - Norman Rasmussen - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/ From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 7 01:20:32 2005 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Licquia) Date: Wed Dec 7 12:59:05 2005 Subject: [py-transports] PyMSN-t avtar hash In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 20:15 +0200, Norman Rasmussen wrote: > in this case a _tiny_ change to gajim, or we change all of: > JEP-0153/Psi/Kopete/iChat/PyMSNt/etc/etc. IMHO, the JEP needs to be changed either way.
