On 15 November 2017 at 08:59, Ruslan N. Marchenko <m...@ruff.mobi> wrote: > > > On 14.11.2017 22:37, Sam Whited wrote: >> >> >> What do the server devs here think? >> >> > To be fair this protocol is implemented in majority(?) of existing xmpp > server implementations so the burden is zero. > The question is rather - what is the future vision for this component > protocol? It considered as a necessary communication method for new external > services or s2s with all the new features (like bidi) is sufficient making > this one redundant. My personal answer is - go S2S. But at the same time i'm > not doing much of component development therefore cannot say whether > XEP-0114 is really resolving some corner cases hence being irreplaceable.
Having written Metre, which implements *only* S2S and '114, I can tell you it's not straightforward. I've just spent a couple of weeks on Openfire's implementation to remove a bug there, too, and I've worked on other implementations as well - bugs are tricky to find, the edge cases are many, authentication is a tricksy nightmare. If I were writing a standalone XMPP service now, I wouldn't want to write (another) S2S implementation - I'd want to just connect using a lightweight protocol and have the server to do heavy lifting. I did propose, as part of this work, a component protocol based on profiling S2S with mandatory Bidi in order to replace '114, but Council rejected this: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/s2s-components.html Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
