On 11.11.2017 12:04, Georg Lukas wrote: > * Florian Schmaus <[email protected]> [2017-11-10 21:54]: >>> - bare-JID = all-clients + archive >>> - full-JID = single client, no carbons, no archive, no redirection >> >> Which rules of RFC 6121 do you exactly need/want to bend or violate? > > The only RFC6121 rule that needs to go is the re-routing of "chat" > messages sent to an unavailable full-JID: §8.5.3.2.1. > https://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc6121.html#rules-localpart-fulljid-nomatch
"If there is one available resource with a non-negative presence priority then the server MUST deliver the message to that resource." That is a tough one. Even if clients signal/negotiate that this rule should be ignored by the server, it would possibly break the senders expectations. Therefore the sender has to signal that he wants your semantics when using messages-to-full-jid. And, iff all sessions of the recipient signal your semantics, the recipients server could do what you want if the message-to-full-jid is annotated, while additionally being able to perform a reasonable, i.e. RFC compliant, fallback if the message annotation is not there. That could work while being RFC compliant, although it sounds awfully complex. But if that is what is required to stay RFC compliant… Maybe I'm missing something? - Florian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
