Re: [Standards] XEP-0175 1.2rc1

2009-09-03 Thread Home

--- Original message ---

From: Kevin Smith 
Sent: 3/9/'09,  18:07

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

In my working version of the spec, I now have:

  On public servers where the same JID is reused for multiple
  anonymous sessions, the server MAY ignore the resource
  identifier provided by the client (if any) and instead assign
  a resource identifier that it generates on behalf of the client.

OK?


Seems consistent with what we agreed tonight, thanks :)


If I might be a PITA for a sec, it'd seem good to capture the discussion on why 
it might be useful sometimes, and why you might not want to others.

Indeed, it might be better to insist that servers can be configured either 
way...

Re: [Standards] XEP-0175 1.2rc1

2009-09-03 Thread Kevin Smith
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> In my working version of the spec, I now have:
>
>   On public servers where the same JID is reused for multiple
>   anonymous sessions, the server MAY ignore the resource
>   identifier provided by the client (if any) and instead assign
>   a resource identifier that it generates on behalf of the client.
>
> OK?

Seems consistent with what we agreed tonight, thanks :)

/K

(sorry, got saved to drafts in the gmail outage, and never sent)