-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/10/09 1:50 PM, Fabio Forno wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > >> No, because "conference.jabber.org" needs SRV records just the same as any >> other domain. > > + > >>> No, since all the cases where we may need the concept of subdomain >>> could be solved at application level with other extensions (e.g. I'm >>> thinking of a case we worked on time ago where we had to consider a >>> subdomain trusted and autoaccept all subscribe from that subdomain) >>> >>> >> I would argue that there is no such thing as a subdomain, from the >> perspective of XMPP. > > Yes, I was about to to answer with some long philosophical > consideration about what is what we call a subdomain, but the correct > approach is indeed that. The protocol shall not have the concept of > subdomain, if somebody wants to consider something a subdomain for > configuration or application issue is free to do that.
Exactly. 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/ iEYEARECAAYFAkqpWfQACgkQNL8k5A2w/vwpagCgiVhQSvNke9FS967BmsbdiHY6 h4UAoPqGGvC2kqQk7b0ZpM/FnTqEBBte =FeAS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
