On 1 June 2018 at 17:19, Florian Schmaus <f...@geekplace.eu> wrote: > On 01.06.2018 17:57, Kevin Smith wrote: > > On 1 Jun 2018, at 16:47, Florian Schmaus <f...@geekplace.eu> wrote: > >> > >> On 31.05.2018 13:45, Kevin Smith wrote: > >>> We’ve had some discussions recently about whether presence should come > from the channel’s JID, the user’s proxy JID, or be encoded in pubsub. > Similarly whether messages should be coming from the channel’s JID or the > user’s proxy JID. I think the argument that things should come from the > user’s in-channel JID rather than the channel’s is reasonable - this is > also what happens already in MUC and is familiar. > >>> > >>> The reason for the proxy JIDs is that we need a stable identifier for > the user in the channel, > >>> and we need it to be addressable per client. > >> > >> Why was that again? Do we really need to encode four bits of information > >> in a single JID? > > > > IQs, mostly, they need to be address translated to the user’s full JID, > which means encoding the full JID and the channel into the initial ‘to’. > > But that only means you need a way to retrieve a JID which acts as proxy > JID for the user's real full JID. Not that MIX messages have to > originate from such an address. Right? > > >> <message from="channel@mixservice.domain.example/user" > >> to="user@other.example" …> > >> <mix-message sender-resource="b481e03f-c633-4704-a877-f8222eb02bc7"/> > >> <body>…</body> > >> </message> > > > > That looks rather like option 2, with the added resource payload (which > is probably not needed?). Option 2 sees messages sent from > channel@domain/user. > Presence is different (but you note looking at the presence node for > full-JID information here as well). > > It sure is similar. I just wonder if MIX channels need to send > participants presences from a JID that encodes all four bits of > information (similar to what Steve suggested). > > Alternatively: Why do MIX channels need to send presence status of > *participants* as "standard" presence stanzas? Instead interested > parties could retrieve presence updates via standard pubsub push > messages (If I read xep403 correctly, presence information is already > stored in PubSub nodes). > > You're suggesting XEP-0207?
> - Florian > > > > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org > _______________________________________________ > >
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
