(I note it's only the text/plain alternative of your messages which
is mangled beyond belief. Is it Hotmail doing this?)
On Wed May 7 19:16:34 2008, Stephen Pendleton wrote:
Maybe I am missing something, but what do you mean by "the binary
data stream which contains the opening <stream:stream>". Do you
mean non-ascii? If so, isn't the opening <stream:stream> ascii?
ASCII fits very nicely inside a binary data stream, which is just as
well, because that particular data stream does indeed start off with
some ASCII. And then does a TLS handshake, and continues with TLS
records.
The current stanza flow is shown below. There are currently three
stream restarts, indicated by the <stream:stream> stanzas. I think
what is proposed is just to eliminate the 'extra' <stream:stream>
stanzas (2 from the server, 2 from the client).
You've run together three different streams, with four different XML
streams running inside them. Apologies for the overloading of the
term "stream" - I can't think of a better word right now.
When you say "[TLS negotiation]" and continue with other XML, what
you actually could do more accurately is write "[Unreadable TLS 8-bit
non-line-orientated data]". Much the same where you don't mention the
layer insertion at all at the XEP-0138 point. This is what Justin
means by saying that it reduces the "XMLishness" of the XML stream -
it really isn't a complete document without those stream restarts.
Frankly, I'm not bothered at all by whether it's classically XML or
not, it's much more interesting, to me, to argue this one over
round-trips, and other things which are actually useful - I'm afraid
I'm with Curtis, whether you think stream restarts are evil or not,
they're here to stay, now, irregardless of whether we try to avoid
them.
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
