* Jonas Wielicki <[email protected]> [2017-04-27 19:24]: > The UX is one thing. I’d first like to clear how N=1 would work > implementation > wise.
Sorry, but this is doing it the wrong way around. You can store a list of tuples of (token, counter, max validity), either on the server or in the client. This is how yaxim currently does PARS. You could define an IQ to query the server for a new token, given a counter and a max validity, and let the server implementation sort it out. This is the easy part. The hard part is to define the right UX and the right security limits. I think it is a security problem to have tokens that don't impose any limits, and I think that N=1 is a very sane default limit for invitations. Maybe I'm wrong with this, or maybe not. But we shouldn't let an implementation detail define our UX. Georg -- || http://op-co.de ++ GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N ++ || gpg: 0x962FD2DE || o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+ || || Ge0rG: euIRCnet || X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e++++ h- r++ y? || ++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_________________________________________________||
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
