On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Justin Karneges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 06 May 2008 12:37 pm, Alexander Gnauck wrote: > > * gets us closer to "real xml" > > I'd have thought so too, but upon closer analysis I found that the removal of > stream restarts would not get us closer to "real xml". Rather, it would make > things worse. > > Sure, any psuedo text about XMPP will look very pretty: > > <stream:stream> > <starttls/> > [TLS handshake] > <message/> > </stream:stream> > > But this is deceptive. The resulting protocol flow is even less like XML and > is in general harder to implement. This will not stop the "real xml" > complainers, and in fact we might even gain some new ones.
If the handshake is transparently handled by the underlying transport, what it is popping out is real xml, without restarts and "noise". I think that we should just make clear that things happen at different protocol layers. -- Fabio Forno, Ph.D. Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com jabber id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
