On 4/27/10 2:30 PM, Kevin Smith wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 4/27/10 3:00 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >>> In XMPP, each stream has a default namespace. Stanzas are the elements >>> with local-name "message", "presence", or "iq", qualified by that >>> default namespace. Streams also have other, specifically documented, >>> top-level elements, such as those for SASL, or TLS negotiation - these >>> being explicitly signalled as being acceptable. Other unknown top-level >>> elements will cause the connection to be dropped. >> >> Sometime yesterday (before you sent your message to the list) I wrote >> the following text in my working copy of 3920bis: >> >> *** >> >> Note: Because a client sends stanzas over a stream whose default >> namespace is 'jabber:client', if the server to which the client is >> connected needs to route a client-generated stanza to another server >> then it MUST "re-scope" the stanza so that its default namespace is >> 'jabber:server' (i.e., it MUST NOT send a stanza qualified by the >> 'jabber:client' namespace over a stream whose default namespace is >> 'jabber:server'). Similarly, a routing server MUST "re-scope" a stanza >> received over a server-to-server stream (whose default namespace is >> 'jabber:server') so that the stanza is qualified by the 'jabber:client' >> namespace before sending it over a client-to-server stream (whose >> default namespace is 'jabber:client'). >> >> *** >> >> That might not be precise enough, and it leaves out the error handling. > > That seems fairly definitive and, as Dave mentions, the error handling > is already defined elsewhere.
It's definitive, but it might not be correct. Do we need to be so strict about this? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
