Philipp Hancke wrote: > Justin Karneges wrote: >> Of all the places in Jabber to value backwards compatibility, dialback >> is arguably the most important. IMO, the real trouble is not the >> implementation difficulty, but the fact that dialback is >> underspecified in the RFCs. Let's get this thing fully specified in >> the bis drafts, and then I agree with Matthias: MUST for receiving and >> MAY for sending is the most compatible path to take. > > Is it necessary to specify the gory details of when-to-send in the bis > drafts or would it be sufficient in a XEP?
I would prefer to avoid those gory details in the RFCs. Heck, in the tradition of offloading privacy lists from rfc3921bis to XEP-0016, does it make sense to document all of dialback in a XEP? /psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
