On Aug 13, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
So, to summarize, a ghost/outsider:
- Can see the presence of group members
- Can send messages to the whole group
- Is not seen as part of the group (no presence)
- Does not receive messages sent to the group
Yes.
A few questions...
1.
Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL J9935 wrote:
> Peter,
>
> I guess my fundamental issue is that the council is making an
> architectural decision of using shared document editing without
> understanding the problem or even having read the xep being submitted
> as many folks admitted to not eve
Unnikrishnan V wrote:
> I am not sure of any other services than used for voip ( stun,
> stun-relay etc ).
Not yet. ;-)
> As in my eyes XEP-215 is doing only _stun._udp srv query ( may be its my
> eye problem ).
>
> Now for adding turn we have to modify XEp-215.What if somebody want
> to use
I am not sure of any other services than used for voip ( stun,
stun-relay etc ).
As in my eyes XEP-215 is doing only _stun._udp srv query ( may be its my eye
problem ).
Now for adding turn we have to modify XEp-215.What if somebody want to
use rsip instead of stun and stun-relay ? for the same
Peter,
I guess my fundamental issue is that the council is making an architectural
decision of using shared document editing without understanding the problem or
even having read the xep being submitted as many folks admitted to not even
reading it.
So if we are going to do this objectively t
Boyd Fletcher wrote:
> We have looked extensively at both PubSub (at Joe Hildebrand¹s suggestion)
> and ReX and have found both lacking in several significant ways. You can
> find our issues with pubsub in the mailing list logs from about 1.5-2 years
> ago. Our comments on ReX are:
As mentioned in
We have looked extensively at both PubSub (at Joe Hildebrand¹s suggestion)
and ReX and have found both lacking in several significant ways. You can
find our issues with pubsub in the mailing list logs from about 1.5-2 years
ago. Our comments on ReX are:
1. REX has no history; either absolute or
Version 1.4 of XEP-0115 (Entity Capabilities) has been released.
Abstract: This document defines an XMPP protocol extension for broadcasting and
dynamically discovering client, device, or generic entity capabilities in a way
that minimizes network impact.
Changelog: In response to persistent se
Version 2.9 of XEP-0004 (Data Forms) has been released.
Abstract: This document defines an XMPP protocol extension for data forms and
generic data description.
Changelog: Clarified the definition and handling of the list-multi and
list-single field types; specified that hidden field values shou
Joe Hildebrand wrote:
>
> On Aug 10, 2007, at 1:38 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Oh, so this is for communities? I need to finish writing up our devcon
>> discussions on that topic. Will try to do that in the next few days.
>
> Yes. N birds, one stone.
Soon.
>> But gosh "rotisiv" is such an
Unnikrishnan V wrote:
> adding my 2 cents for the comets from scott +
>
> It may be nice to upgrade XEP-0215 to discover network servers ( almost
> same functionality as of DNS SRV ) instead of just stun servers only (
> as we discussed early in this list ) so it can look up properly turn
> serv
Remko Tronçon wrote:
This would likely be either
- explicit statement in all xeps that define a feature that the client
shouldn't trust caps (complex to maintain, simple to implement)
- an extension to caps to say "maybe supported, query disco to know for
sure". (complicates caps, add
> This would likely be either
> - explicit statement in all xeps that define a feature that the client
> shouldn't trust caps (complex to maintain, simple to implement)
> - an extension to caps to say "maybe supported, query disco to know for
> sure". (complicates caps, adds complexity,
I think there might be a point in this. Basicly i expect a caps capable
client to completely ignore disco (outside of the caps usage) for a contact
that does caps. So if some feature is not in caps i'd assume the client
doesn't have that feature, unless a) the xep specifies (explicitly!) that
ca
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:41:43AM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> > Dnia 10-08-2007, pi?? o godzinie 16:11 +0100, Richard Dobson napisa??(a):
> >> In that case you would just ignore the attempted shake for people who
> >> you dont want to be able to do it (and probably re
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 02:00:07PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Someone poked me offlist about an oversight in our specs: XEP-0118 (User
> Tune) includes a way to stop sending tune updates, but there is no such
> mechanism in XEP-0107 (User Mood), XEP-0108 (User Activity), etc. This
> seems li
16 matches
Mail list logo
