On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 at 09:03, Daniel Gultsch <[email protected]> wrote: > Personally I see two ways forward. We scrap this XEP or we remove > anything that recommends any binding mechanism over another. Basically > we keep the XEP as a way to signal what binding mechanism the server > supports and that’s it.
I'm in favour of the latter. I know opinions vary (strongly) about whether 'tls-server-end-point' should be deployed by anyone ever, but for as long as there could be multiple channel binding methods (now or in the future) and we don't encode these in mechanism names (as SCRAM doesn't) then I think we should have a way for the server to advertise supported methods separately to SASL mechanisms, or we risk interoperability issues. Regards, Matthew _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
