Nolan Eakins wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Nolan Eakins wrote: >> >> Example 1. Stanza as sent to repeater >> > >> >> <presence xmlns='jabber:client' >> >> from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/foo' >> >> to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >> >> type='probe'/> >> >> We had that in version 0.0.0.5. :) >> >> The problem is that you can't send disco requests or other management >> tasks to the repeater. But you could do that by sending those requests >> to the repeater service and specifying the particular repeater you're >> interested in. >> >> Another thing is that the IQ semantics are helpful here -- the repeater >> validates that it has sent all the stanzas and then sends you an IQ result. > > I fail to understand the gain there. AFAIK, nothing else in Jabber > provides such an ack, not even for a single message. > > Personally, I'm failing to understand this prevalence of using <iq/> > to send messages here and in pubsub.
That train has left the station w.r.t. pubsub. But nothing forces us to follow that pattern here. > It really boils down to: given a > basic client that understands some disco, how can I make use of this > repeater w/o using the XML console? IMHO this spec is not for clients, it's something that servers and components (MUC, pubsub, etc.) would use among themselves. > Presumably via disco and perhaps data forms a client can manage a set > of repeaters. No new code is needed. It would give me a JID that I > could add to my roster (maybe that gets done automagically?) or > directly send a message to w/ some copy and paste. Yes, that is attractive *if* we think this is something that clients need or would use. But note the spam potential. :-) > As is, this is one more XEP that must be specifically supported by > both clients and servers. Yay! See above. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
