-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 7/14/09 11:04 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Peter Saint-Andre<[email protected]> wrote: >>> - It does a jabber:iq:roster request on gateway.example.com > >> This is not limited to gateways, but also to shared groups services >> (e.g., you get all the XSF members in a special "Members" group). > > This is so simple and solves the problem so well that I have no idea > why we haven't been doing it from the start. Good catch. > It solves a bunch of issues, like levels of trust with the transport > to edit your roster, of migration between transports or servers, > groups within the transport, contact naming, and jid escaping.
We have long resisted this because we saw jabber:iq:roster as all and only between you and your server (cf. recent discussion about 3921bis on the XMPP WG list). If we remove that restriction, you can have a "roster relationship" with any other entity, such as shared groups service. > So yes, let's use standard rosters for transports and shared groups, > and let's keep roster item exchange just for sharing contacts. WFM. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpcymMACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzq1gCgulBtR8U2mhlA+2Y+rYXo0+/u UO8AoJFeaVlpXBvA9BUpComKYqfDRDyP =IOCk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
