On 06/08/2008 2:30 AM, Tomasz Sterna wrote: > Dnia 2008-06-05, czw o godzinie 15:39 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre pisze: >> Should we allow subscriptions to a full JID instead of a bare JID? > > We should disallow full JID based subscriptions. This introduces many > inconsistencies and doubts in presence handling. > > >> I know people have said there are legitimate scenarios when you might >> want to do that, but I've never found them compelling. > > There are legitimate scenarios to have full JIDs on roster, though. I.e. > 'server.tld/echo' on default user roster, to hint user how to test the > connection (like Skype's echo service).
Yes I think that makes sense. > But even though, presence MUST be handled by bare JID of this roster > item. So, if a user's client sends a subscription request to a full JID, should the user's server ignore the resource and send the request to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> instead of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource>? And if the contact's server receives a subscription request for a full JID, should it also ignore the resource? I have some text to that effect in my working copy now (but I think it is MAY, not SHOULD or MUST). Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
