On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 09:09:28 +0200 Yann Leboulanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > Yann Leboulanger wrote: > >> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >>> Has any MUC implementation coded in support for the "unique room > >>> name request" feature described in Section 10.1.4 of XEP-0045? I > >>> think this feature is unnecessary and (in the interest of > >>> simplification) I would like to remove it from XEP-0045. > >> > >> In our client (Gajim), we use it for chat to muc convertion too. > >> If it's not supported by MUC component, we do nickname + random > >> number, but it's convenient to be sure we won't have a confict. > > > > But then you have a dependency on the server side, right? Why not > > just generate a UUID on the client side? > > > > Because we don't know all the rooms that are opened, and we can't be > sure our room name will be unique. > You can't be sure the server won't burn when generating the UUID either... and it would cause more harm. It's very improbable just as collisions in good UUIDs. -- Web: http://www.pavlix.net/ Jabber & Mail: pavlix(at)pavlix.net OpenID: pavlix.net
