Hello Lance.
UPnP is mostly used for local discovery. However, it is not limited to local
discovery, as recent vulnerabilities have shown [1]. It permits you to go as
far out as IGMP allows you to go. In networks supporting IP-TV, IGMP is allowed
in all routers from the home firewall all the wa
Hello Johannes.
The thought has crossed my mind. It has been nagging me as a good thing to do,
but I haven't come to the point yet to try it out.
But, the reasons to use UPnP, instead of, or in parallel with DNS, include the
following:
* UPnP is server-less. Works using multi-cast and single-c
Hello Matt (again) and Council members.
Seems I sent the last mail (below) too quickly, and started to think a little,
with regards to IBB. I have a set of questions/reflections:
The IBB requires an open iq-stanza (with response and possible handshake) and a
closing iq-stanza (with response) fo
So, for the Last Call that was supposed to expire in December but we all
forgot...
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to
> clarify an existing protocol?
Yes
> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and
> requirements?
On May 22, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Spencer MacDonald
wrote:
> Thanks Lance,
>
> OK so the xmlns element should be a parent not a sibling.
>
>
Yes, the extension using stanza forward is supposed to contain it. This is a
SHOULD in XEP-0297 (hrm, I wonder if this ought to be a MUST?)...now (-:
Thanks Lance,
OK so the xmlns element should be a parent not a sibling.
Regards
Spencer
On Wednesday, 22 May 2013 at 20:37, Lance Stout wrote:
> On May 22, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Spencer MacDonald
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Maybe there is a good reason for it, but in XEP-0280 Message Carbons
On May 22, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Spencer MacDonald
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Maybe there is a good reason for it, but in XEP-0280 Message Carbons the
> forwarded stanza is nested in either a received or sent element with the
> carbons xmlns.
>
> In XEP-0313 Message Archive Management the result element
Hi,
Maybe there is a good reason for it, but in XEP-0280 Message Carbons the
forwarded stanza is nested in either a received or sent element with the
carbons xmlns.
In XEP-0313 Message Archive Management the result element with the mam xmlns is
a sibling of the forwarded stanza.
Should there
< http://joeyandchristy.com/images/artextras/logos/awebreadylogos/resurrect.jpg
>
On Nov 28, 2012, at 9:34 AM, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0297
> (Stanza Forwarding).
>
> Abstract: This document defines a protocol to forwa
I really only have one comment, and that is around the need (and algorithm) for
itemID generation.
* I think it would help greatly to add a statement or paragraph explaining why
it's necessary. I personally don't really see the need, given a pubsub service
MUST generate unique item IDs.
* I t
I have some comments regarding the Proto-XEP "HTTP over XMPP":
* I don't think the use of is appropriate here, as per the
guidelines in RFC6120 ยง 8.2.3. At a minimum, the unsafe methods (e.g., DELETE,
POST, PUT, et al) ought to be , although a strong argument can
be made that all ought to be
Oh -- well I feel foolish :) Thanks Sergey!
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
> You don't need to find any code in the ejabberd sources. Ejabberd will
> just route a full-jid addressed stanza to a xmpp-client and IT will
> answer your query. Ejabberd just has no idea of time
You don't need to find any code in the ejabberd sources. Ejabberd will
just route a full-jid addressed stanza to a xmpp-client and IT will
answer your query. Ejabberd just has no idea of timezones of it's clients.
This code is responsible only to ejabberd's self time, no more, no less.
Anyway, it
Its possible theres another IQ handler elsewhere in the code but, that
seems really unlikely. For those of you that know Erlang, see below.
process_local_iq(_From, _To, #iq{type = Type, sub_el = SubEl} = IQ) ->
case Type of
set ->
IQ#iq{type = error, sub_el = [SubEl, ?ERR_NOT_ALLOWED]};
ge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/22/13 6:30 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> Yes, I think it's a useful thing. And useful to be distinct from
> '174, too.
Right, which is why I removed the reference to it in XEP-0174 as a
"generalization" -- that was just confusing.
Peter
- --
Pete
Yes, I think it's a useful thing. And useful to be distinct from '174, too.
Dave.
On 05/22/2013 07:22 PM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> Version 2.1.12 ignores to in the IQ
It sounds like smth impossible. I use ejabberd and iq:time works just
fine when addressing stanza appropriately.
--
With best regards,
Sergey Dobrov,
XMPP Developer and JRuDevels.org founder.
On 2013-05-22 14:15, Noah Schwartz wrote:
I'm basing the question on the ejabberd code. Version 2.1.12 ignores to in the
IQ. Ill be looking to patch this...
Are you saying that ejabberd intercepts stanzas addressed to full
JIDs (with resource)? That'd would be a major bug per section 10.5.4
I'm basing the question on the ejabberd code. Version 2.1.12 ignores to in the
IQ. Ill be looking to patch this...
Sent from my iPhone
On May 22, 2013, at 7:33 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On 2013-05-22 12:22, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Don't you forget to specify user's resource in th
On 2013-05-22 13:56, Dave Cridland wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Ralph Meijer mailto:ral...@ik.nu>> wrote:
It is a nice, broader explanation of how things work. XEP-0174's
description on how to set up the connection is pretty minimal.
XEP-0246 goes into detail and, for
On 2013-05-10 05:04, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 5/8/13 2:05 AM, Krishna Chaitanya (kchaitan) wrote:
Hi,
I would like to submit an enhancement to XEP-0060 specification to
provide a mechanism for the node owner to subscribe a client /*with
subscription options*/. As per section 8.2.2 (Modify S
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> It is a nice, broader explanation of how things work. XEP-0174's
> description on how to set up the connection is pretty minimal. XEP-0246
> goes into detail and, for example, specifies the values of the addressing
> information in the strea
On 2013-05-17 18:18, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
[..]
It doesn't really normatively reference XEP-0246. I'd propose the
following wording change:
OLD
Once discovery has been completed, the clients are able to negotiate
an XML stream between themselves (as generalized in End-to-End XML
Streams [2])
On 2013-05-22 12:22, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
Hello,
Don't you forget to specify user's resource in the "to" iq's attribute?
This is a very good point. Let me clarify.
If you send stanzas to a user's bare JID, these are to be handled
by the server on behalf of the user. It makes sense that the
Hello,
Don't you forget to specify user's resource in the "to" iq's attribute?
On 05/22/2013 04:49 AM, Noah Schwartz wrote:
> I'm looking to add a feature to my client that will show the user the
> timezone of the person they're talking to. We have a number of offices
> around the world and I fee
25 matches
Mail list logo
