On 3/12/18 9:17 AM, Christian Schudt wrote: > Hi, > > my original question quickly drifted away to a discussion about the use case > of serverless messaging. > > But I feel my concern was not addressed: > > 1. Why can’t the receiving entity include its Entity Caps as stream feature > as described in XEP-0115?
That would be consistent with https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0115.html#stream > 2. Why should we instead use disco#info? I don't consider disco#info in > stream features an optimization which justifies the additional implementation > overhead: > - Deal with Entity Caps in TXT records. It's only to potentially know an > entity's capabilities before having initiated a stream with it, right? Sounds > ok then, but unreliable. > - Deal with yet another stream feature which covers an existing use case: to > know an entity's capabilities (Entity Caps, Caps 2.0, disco#info) > - Nowhere else is disco#info mentioned to be included in stream features > Thoughts? I can't recall why we defined this disco#info thing but in hindsight I agree that it's ugly. > I'd prefer the following: > The receiving entity includes Entity Caps in it's stream features. If not > known by the initiating entity, it may request disco#info and proceed > normally (verify and cache the result). Most, or even all of an existing > Entity Caps implementation could be reused then. Agreed. > 3. Can the section be updated although the specification is final? I would not object. Peter _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________