On Jun 24, 2011, at 7:10 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > Re: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/realtimetext.html > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Kurt Zeilenga <[email protected]> > wrote: > I am quite concerned that the current spec offers zero negotiation of the > extension before its use. > I urge the authors to add some negotiation, preferable before it's published > as XEP. > > I agree, we are going to be developing a session negotiation mechanism over > time: > However, it is not necessary for interoperability right now: > > There was a negotiation mechanism in the previous spec, but it was claimed to > be overly complicated. Due to section 4.3.1 (backwards compatible), it is not > necessary to even use 'start' or 'stop' since RTT clients can work without > 'start' and 'stop'. A sender can send RTT right away, and a recipient can > interpret RTT right away. > > Experimentation during the Experimental stage is needed to determine best > interoperability for the process of starting a real-time-text session
We need to keep experiments from harming our production networks. If this extensions gets used blindly, it might well trash some production network. I don't care how this feature is negotiated between the two entities intended to experiment with it, I only care that I have some ability to disrupt that negotiation so I can prevent this extensions use and hence protect my network from the real harm that would come by its use on my network. -- Kurt > and signalling the remote end that a session has started (in the future, it > might be a process where one end starts a session, and the other end does an > Accept/Reject -- similiar to AOL AIM Real Time IM. Or it might be a > different preferred method of starting a RTT session). It is also a "out in > the field" user preference that might influence the preferred session > negotiation algorithm, and several companies (4) are already working on XMPP > RTT based on this standard. Due to section 4.3.1, failure of signalling is > not a catastrophe at this early experimental stage, RTT will simply be turned > off but the chat conversation will continue to function normally. > > I covered some of this discussion in the "Supplemental" document at > www.realjabber.org as a potential candidate mechanism to mimic the AIM > Real-Time IM capability. > > Mark Rejhon
