Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 05-07-2007, czw o godzinie 16:31 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
> napisał(a):
>> Now, a 'from' address of the full JID seems odd to me. What if I send
>> an IQ-set from one of my resources to another? Does that mean I can do
>> roster pushes directly from one resource to anoth
Dnia 05-07-2007, czw o godzinie 16:31 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
napisał(a):
> Now, a 'from' address of the full JID seems odd to me. What if I send
> an IQ-set from one of my resources to another? Does that mean I can do
> roster pushes directly from one resource to another without updating
> the ro
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Tomasz Sterna wrote:
Dnia 27-06-2007, śro o godzinie 16:50 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
napisał(a):
So I propose the following text:
A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster set, and MUST
treat any roster "set" as applying to the sender. A server MUST
NO
Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 27-06-2007, śro o godzinie 16:50 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
> napisał(a):
>> So I propose the following text:
>>
>>A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster set, and MUST
>>treat any roster "set" as applying to the sender. A server MUST
>>NOT include a
Dnia 27-06-2007, śro o godzinie 16:50 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre
napisał(a):
> So I propose the following text:
>
>A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster set, and MUST
>treat any roster "set" as applying to the sender. A server MUST
>NOT include a 'from' address on a roster p
RFC 3921 saith:
A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster "set", and MUST
treat any roster "set" as applying to the sender. For added safety,
a client SHOULD check the "from" address of a "roster push" (incoming
IQ of type "set" containing a roster item) to ensure that it is f
