Re: [Standards] Correction to 3290bis4

2007-11-02 Thread Alexey Melnikov
Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Toly Menn wrote: Also, section 7.3.4 indicates that the receiving end of the connection SHOULD allow at least 2 and no more then 5 retries from the abort. Does this make sense for s2s connections? EXTERNAL mechanism? That rule (which IIRC we borrowed from

Re: [Standards] Correction to 3290bis4

2007-11-02 Thread Justin Karneges
On Friday 02 November 2007 1:44 am, Alexey Melnikov wrote: Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Toly Menn wrote: Also, section 7.3.4 indicates that the receiving end of the connection SHOULD allow at least 2 and no more then 5 retries from the abort. Does this make sense for s2s connections? EXTERNAL

Re: [Standards] Correction to 3290bis4

2007-10-29 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Toly Menn wrote: Hi everyone, In RFC 3290bis4, section 7.3.4 (http://www.xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis-04.html#sasl-process-neg-abort) the response to abort/ is aborted/, but in section 7.5.1 it is failureaborted//failure (I omitted the namespace). I think the

[Standards] Correction to 3290bis4

2007-10-26 Thread Toly Menn
Hi everyone, In RFC 3290bis4, section 7.3.4 (http://www.xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis-04.html#sasl-process-neg-abort) the response to abort/ is aborted/, but in section 7.5.1 it is failureaborted//failure (I omitted the namespace).  I think the latter is correct. Also,