Hi,
On Oct 7, 2008, at 1:19 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
Doesn't it break the purpose of the caps? I originally thought the
authors wanted to have a reasonable number of different caps to
cache
at the servers.
There's also that the disco spec says that <identity /> should be
consistent beyond what is being suggested here.
You mean section 6.3, Response Consistency?
I think overloading identity at the deployment level is a bad idea,
fwiw.
I like to have a name for each connection, and I don't think using the
resource is the sane way to do it. Identity name was a good candidate
IMHO, until Pavel mentioned the 115 cache-hit rate problem.
Moving the name to a different spec is ok by me. Maybe even 198.
Best regards,
--
Pedro Melo
Blog: http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/
XMPP ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use XMPP!
