On 16 July 2012 18:10, Justin Karneges <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, July 16, 2012 09:53:02 AM you wrote: >> On 7/16/12 10:49 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: >> > On Monday, July 16, 2012 08:35:59 AM Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> >> I've just reviewed XEP-0297 (Stanza Forwarding) and I think it looks >> >> good. One small comment, it would be good to describe briefly the kinds >> >> of extensions that might re-use this format, and specifically to cite >> >> draft-miller-xmpp-e2e. >> > >> > I also wonder if we could restrict the namespace of the wrapped stanza to >> > always be "jabber:client". >> >> What if servers forward or encapsulate server-to-server stanzas? I could >> definitely see a use for that in debugging or incident reporting. > > Then they'd be converted to "jabber:client" before encapsulation. I bring this > up because this is how the various e2e proposals have tended to work, and > ensures clients don't have to deal with multiple namespaces.
This does make some sense. In Prosody a stanza is most of the time detached from its parent namespace, and in fact our MAM plugin already unconditionally sets jabber:client. I can't think of a case where you would need it to be jabber:server, even for the use-cases Peter brought up. I know top of my list for XMPP 2.0 (1.1??) would be a single namespace for all stream types :) Regards, Matthew
