Thanks everyone for the quick responses. I did decide to read further down RFC 6121 after I sent the email out and came across section 8.5.2 which does seem to do a deep dive into the topic. Some of what we are dealing with are IQs and not actually Message stanzas so that section helps shed light on that topics as well.
Thanks again. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave Cridland Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 12:08 PM To: XMPP Standards Subject: Re: [Standards] Question regarding a server's handling of resource identifiers On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Todd Herman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: * Send the message to the resource with the highest priority This is legal behaviour, as Matthew says. If it's of type normal or chat, anyway. * Send the stanza to all resources This, too, is legal behaviour - though more commonly, all resources without a negative priority. Personally I'm less keen on this, but not hugely so - if the sender wants this behaviour, though, then can use type headline, which does this. * Drop the message and return an error (forcing direct interactions with resources only) This would be a Bad Thing, and isn't allowable under RFC 6121. Any input would be greatly appreciated. I noticed you cited RFC 6120. That's a fine spec, and many of my best friends are RFC 6120s, however I suspect you want to read through RFC 6121 §8.5.2, and in particular §8.5.2.1.1, which explains what to do if a <message/> stanza is received to a bare jid when one or more non-negative priority resources is online (which, I think, is more or less what you're asking). Dave.
