Re: [Standards] Explicitly require SRV RRs / XEP-0156 in compliance suites?

2021-02-10 Thread Kevin Smith
On 10 Feb 2021, at 09:31, Florian Schmaus wrote: > The purpose of the compliance suites is to incentivize implementing certain > features *and* go guide new developers towards things worth implementing. > Hence, do we really want that clients can claim XEP-0423's "Core Client" > compliance

Re: [Standards] Explicitly require SRV RRs / XEP-0156 in compliance suites?

2021-02-10 Thread Florian Schmaus
On 2/10/21 9:54 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 15:50, Florian Schmaus > wrote: On 2/3/21 3:52 PM, Sonny Piers wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, at 14:20, Florian Schmaus wrote: >> On 2/3/21 1:47 PM, Sonny Piers wrote> >> > The equivalent

Re: [Standards] Explicitly require SRV RRs / XEP-0156 in compliance suites?

2021-02-10 Thread Dave Cridland
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 15:50, Florian Schmaus wrote: > On 2/3/21 3:52 PM, Sonny Piers wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, at 14:20, Florian Schmaus wrote: > >> On 2/3/21 1:47 PM, Sonny Piers wrote> > >> > The equivalent for TCP (srv records) is in core so why not its > >> > equivalent for web ? > >>

[Standards] Explicitly require SRV RRs / XEP-0156 in compliance suites?

2021-02-03 Thread Florian Schmaus
On 2/3/21 3:52 PM, Sonny Piers wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, at 14:20, Florian Schmaus wrote: On 2/3/21 1:47 PM, Sonny Piers wrote> > The equivalent for TCP (srv records) is in core so why not its > equivalent for web ? I don't see xmpp-*. SRV RRs in 'Core'. Only xmpps-*. SRV RRs are in