Le vendredi 8 septembre 2017, 14:41:44 CEST Daniel Gultsch a écrit :
> 2017-09-08 14:36 GMT+02:00 Goffi <[email protected]>:
> > Also HTTP upload means that server must handle a totally different
> > protocol/ server with all the security considerations that this imply.
> > I'm also thinking about serverless.
> 
> Are you proposing that the jingle component only supports IBB
> transports? Or is SOCKS not a totally different protocol?

You are comparing the complexity of a SOCKS5 component with a HTTP server ?

Anyway I think this conversation is going out of the topic. As I've said on 
the xsf@ MUC room, my goal is not to fight against HTTP upload, I like its 
simplicity and I think it's legitimate. My points are:

1) if you do a temporary/persistant storage XEP, please make it generic enough 
so it can be used both with HTTP upload and Jingle

2) not too many things should be built on HTTP upload because it would make it 
more complex (and simplicity is its raison d'être), and because we would start 
to have concurrent features with Jingle, making the live of everybody more 
complicated

3) xmpp: URI should be usable with avatars, not only http: ones

That's all, I don't want to fight against HTTP upload or anything like that.

Cheers
Goffi
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to