Re: [Standards] Query of XEP for PING
Presence of buddy itself is indicative of network availability. Is my understanding right? If yes, then is ping required to determine network availability? Also, does this mean XMPP server should allow pings only between buddies? Thanks, Priya On 22-May-2014 6:07 PM, "Dave Cridland" wrote: > On 22 May 2014 08:03, priya v wrote: > >> Security Considerations under XEP for PING (XEP-0199) states this - >> >> "If a connected resource receives a ping request but it does not want to >> reveal its network availability to the sender for any reason (e.g., because >> the sender is not authorized to know the connected resource's >> availability), then it too MUST reply with a error." >> >> How does one determine if the sender is authorized or not authorized to >> know the connected resources's availability? >> >> > The presence subscription state (ie, in the roster) would tell you this. >
Re: [Standards] Query of XEP for PING
On 22 May 2014 08:03, priya v wrote: > Security Considerations under XEP for PING (XEP-0199) states this - > > "If a connected resource receives a ping request but it does not want to > reveal its network availability to the sender for any reason (e.g., because > the sender is not authorized to know the connected resource's > availability), then it too MUST reply with a error." > > How does one determine if the sender is authorized or not authorized to > know the connected resources's availability? > > The presence subscription state (ie, in the roster) would tell you this.
Re: [Standards] Some questions on MUC / XEP-0045
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Christian Schudt wrote: >> 3. Can a client request multiple affiliations and get all affiliated users? >> Like: >> >> http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#admin";> >> >> >> >> >> >> Which would return all members. >> >> >> It's not against the schema, of course, but I think that's there for >> multiple modifications - something I actually think is a bad idea. I don't >> see any support for it in the text, though. > > Actually I think, this would be fine and it also feels natural to do. > Modifying owner/admin/member list is all the same and one could modify > affiliations of all users in one run. I don't see anything in the text that suggests this is possible, which pretty much means that it's fine for a server to support the query, but not for a client to actually make it without some further, undefined, negotiation. /K
[Standards] Query of XEP for PING
Security Considerations under XEP for PING (XEP-0199) states this - "If a connected resource receives a ping request but it does not want to reveal its network availability to the sender for any reason (e.g., because the sender is not authorized to know the connected resource's availability), then it too MUST reply with a error." How does one determine if the sender is authorized or not authorized to know the connected resources's availability? -- Priya
