On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Philipp Hancke > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> "Note well that for tracking purposes this service assigns a new 'id' to >>>> each message it generates (here using a UUID as defined in RFC 4122)" >>>> >>>> I bet some services do this... making the id at the recipient >>>> unpredictable. >>> >>> >>> Oh, and maybe I can replace your messages. >> >> >> or rewrite the chat history after I left... even a same-fulljid requirement >> doesn't help against that (is there one currently?) > > OK, so I need to add words about not allowing replacement between > full-JID unavailables (to fix the MUC rejoin) and make sure it's > explicit that it must be doing correction only when full-JIDs match.
And also, as Fippo just pointed out to me, never do correction on MUC join context. I wonder if we should just not do it unless you have the real JIDs of the occupants. /K
