------- Original message -------
From: Kevin Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: 3/9/'09, 18:07
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Peter Saint-Andre<[email protected]> wrote:
In my working version of the spec, I now have:
On public servers where the same JID is reused for multiple
anonymous sessions, the server MAY ignore the resource
identifier provided by the client (if any) and instead assign
a resource identifier that it generates on behalf of the client.
OK?
Seems consistent with what we agreed tonight, thanks :)
If I might be a PITA for a sec, it'd seem good to capture the discussion on why
it might be useful sometimes, and why you might not want to others.
Indeed, it might be better to insist that servers can be configured either
way...
