On Fri Sep 19 11:20:18 2008, Sergei Golovan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Dave Cridland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Instead, stanzas which are not namespace well formed SHOULD be
rejected by
> the recipient [with a stanza error], and SHOULD NOT cause a
disconnect in
> clients [ie, don't let this be a DOS]. Clients MUST NOT generate
XML which
> is not namespace well formed [clients have no excuse for this
behaviour],
> servers SHOULD NOT forward such XML and MUST NOT generate it
[newly minted
> XML won't have this problem]. Servers MAY disconnect clients
which generate
> bad XMLNS [potential DOS], however this does not apply to peer
servers.
I would say that this will not help at all (at least if we talk
about
ejabberd). Ejabberd
authors will just say that since there's no "MUST" which ejabberd
violates then it
is perfectly XMPP compliant. So, there's no any incentive to fix
the bug.
I'm afraid you've missed the point entirely.
If mandating perfectly namespace well-formed XML under all
circumstances is so difficult, then we shouldn't be doing so.
Moreover, clients need to cope with bad XMLNS, because it exists now
and is a real, genuine, problem that won't go away whether or not
ejabberd, or M-Link, or however many other servers comply with a
"namespace well-formed" MUST in the future.
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
