* Jonas Wielicki <jo...@wielicki.name> [2018-02-23 11:39]:
> - This is a larger one: If we’re changing XEP-0077 flow in a backward-
> incompatible manner, wouldn’t it make more sense to do this in a wholly new 
> namespace, with a new stream feature to advertise support? That would save a 
> round-trip (to detect that it *won't* work) and allows to passively detect 
> support.

The client advertises suport by adding a <preauth> element into the
initial IQ. AFAIU IBR, the initial IQ needs to be sent anyway, so we are
piggy-backing here without additional round-trips.

The server either ignores the element or returns a modified data form /
IBR pseudo-form if supported.


Georg

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to