Hi Robert! Robert Norris schrieb am 2003-09-24 11:52:12: > - Suitable access controls are required. Obviously, it won't do to > allow anyone to change anyone elses roster. One thought we had is to > restrict operations based on the transport JID (domain) - ie, the > transport can only set roster items of its own users, and when a > roster is retrieved, it only receives items for its own users. > This may not be a good idea, however, as not all servers are > transports - do I really want a remote (Jabber) server to be able to > modify the contacts on my roster for its own users?
I agree that transports should get (restricted) access to the roster items of a user. This may help make better support for other IM systems and syncronizing the roster on the foreign IM system server and the Jabber server. What I don't like is the "domain-only item" hack you subscribed. I think there should be an extension maybe something based somehow on an extended version of jabber:x:roster!? Maybe we could build this in a way that we get basic support for it with existing clients that already support this namespace and full support for clients that fully implement the extensions. I transport would interact with the client and not with the server to query the roster. This would allow to make it the clients decission with something is Opt-In or Opt-Out and if the transports behave like Jabber users or more like native ICQ-/AIM-/MSN-/Yahoo-users. Tot kijk Matthias _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev