On 26/08/14 15:10, Kevin Smith wrote:
> 30 says not to reply with disco to entities not authorised for your presence.
Should the server follow this pseudocode for a disco instead?
if target JID is bare:
# any IQ to user@host is expected to be replied to by the server
reply to it on the user's behalf, describing features of the
server and the account (but nothing about the logged-in
resources on that account, if any)
else if peer is authorized to see user's presence:
# any IQ to user@host/resource is expected to be replied to
# by that resource
forward message to the named resource so it can respond
else:
<service-unavailable/>
Regards,
S
