On 06.07.2016 21:44, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 06.07.2016 20:42, Ivan Vučica wrote:
>> If I am interpreting XEP-0313 correctly, for person-to-person use case,
>> archive is obtained by inquiring the 'current server'. This is usually fine.
>>
>> However, in case of an external transport component
Rapid knee-jerk response:
* Option 3 is entirely viable, I'm not sure immediately why you'd want
Option 4, and it would open up a can of Security Considerations.
* Bear in mind that messages from the remote network that have been sent
over XMPP will *also* end up in the user's archive on the serve
On 2016-07-06 20:42, Ivan Vučica wrote:
> - Option 4: Hack clients to discover and use mod_mam on individual
> full-JIDs. Hack the component to advertise MAM on individual full -JIDs.
> - Additional cap can be advertised by full-JIDs. (No matter if it's
> from a component or not.)
> - Same addi
On 06.07.2016 20:42, Ivan Vučica wrote:
> If I am interpreting XEP-0313 correctly, for person-to-person use case,
> archive is obtained by inquiring the 'current server'. This is usually fine.
>
> However, in case of an external transport component communicating with
> an IM network that can provi
Cheers,
If I am interpreting XEP-0313 correctly, for person-to-person use case,
archive is obtained by inquiring the 'current server'. This is usually fine.
However, in case of an external transport component communicating with an
IM network that can provide its own history, there does not seem t
Am 09.06.2016 um 23:34 schrieb Jonathan Lennox:
Does XEP-167 (or some other XEP) make it possible for a Jingle endpoint to
change, or reorder, its list of supported codecs?
The description-info method makes it possible to change the properties of a
codec; but XEP-167 explicitly says that the o
Am 02.07.2016 um 18:19 schrieb Константин Козлов:
Hello!
There's something, I still cannot understand in XEP-0167. I tried to ask
in both j...@conference.jabber.org and x...@muc.xmpp.org but got no
answer so far.
XEP-0167 chapter 5 says about *session-initiate* request:
/When the initiator send
> > it's just that Steve wants to double-check that the text reflects the
> > Summit agreements before he submits.
>
> Ensuring that the text reflects whatever was agreed on the summit sounds more
> like a reason to make the text public as soon as
> possible, instead of a reason to hold it back
On 05.07.2016 11:10, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2016, at 09:51, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>> XEP development behind closed doors is not desirable.
>
> To be fair, that isn’t what’s happening here,
It was not my intention to suggest that this was the case in MIX. It was
more meant as generic sta
