Matthias Wimmer wrote: > Hi Michal! > > Michal 'vorner' Vaner schrieb: >> What is the problem with saying the server can have a limit and deny to >> perform such crazy operation. > > Sounds reasonable. Roster items are not exchanged between servers,
Yet. :) What happens when we define shared rosters? > so it > seems we do not need a common limit. Each implementation could have it's > own and reject a request that contains longer items. > > If a limitation is added to the spec, it should only be an advice for > the minimum that should be supported by any implementation. Sure. BTW the schemas are NOT normative, so this is mostly a guideline anyway. > And it > should be defined which error is returned if the item is to big. I'm doing that in rfc3920bis, which is why I started to think about the schemas. Specifying this more tightly in rfc3920bis seems uncontroversial to me, I never expected the idea to generate so much list traffic! Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre XMPP Standards Foundation http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
