On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 21:56:43 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote
> On 3/3/10 9:18 PM, chris wrote:
>> I still haven't read any reasonable argument against multiplexed resource
>> binding. The two main points made are "it complicates the protocol" and
>> "for what purpose".
>>
>> To the first point, it was a very simple change to the protocol in my
>> perception and OPTIONAL (unfortunately) at that.
>>
>> To the second point I think this and other threads have answered that
>> question, but essentially it boils down to allowing the only type of XMPP
>> entity, a client, that does not require DNS and custom server support to
>> be something besides an instant messenger or a one off implementation
>> that is only useful within its own network.
>
> As I've already said, if you and other people care about multiplexing
> resources on a single XML stream, then write a document defining how it
> works and propose it for consideration. Basically all you need to do is:
Peter, thanks for the heavy lifting and foot work in laying that out for us.
I certainly care, so we will have to see where this takes us.
regards,
chris
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: jdev-unsubscr...@jabber.org
_______________________________________________
