Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
Abstract: This document specifies a standards-track XMPP protocol extension
that enables server components to connect to XMPP servers.
Changelog: Initial published version. (psa)
Diff: N/A
URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xe
XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
>
> Abstract: This document specifies a standards-track XMPP protocol
> extension that enables server components to connect to XMPP servers.
One of the items up for discussion is the default namespa
On Aug 8, 2007, at 1:44 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
Abstract: This document specifies a standards-track XMPP protocol
extension that enables server components to connect to XMPP servers.
One of
Rachel Blackman wrote:
>
> On Aug 8, 2007, at 1:44 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
>> XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
>>> Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
>>>
>>> Abstract: This document specifies a standards-track XMPP protocol
>>> extension that enables server com
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 1:44 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> > Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
> >
> > Abstract: This document specifies a standards-track XMPP protocol
> > extension that enables server components to connect to X
Dnia 08-08-2007, śro o godzinie 15:11 -0700, Justin Karneges napisał(a):
> I vote not repeating this mistake. This means
> no 'jabber:component' or such. The choice should be between
> 'jabber:client'
> and 'jabber:server' for the namespace. Use a real attribute or
> element to
> indicate com
Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Dnia 08-08-2007, śro o godzinie 15:11 -0700, Justin Karneges napisał(a):
>> I vote not repeating this mistake. This means
>> no 'jabber:component' or such. The choice should be between
>> 'jabber:client'
>> and 'jabber:server' for the namespace. Use a real attribute or
>
Hi Peter!
Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
I don't have a strong preference really. A component feels a bit more
like a client because it is a local connection, plus c2s connections are
simpler than s2s connections. Let's pick one and be done with it. :)
The reason why I for the most part suggest u
Hi Matthias! :)
Matthias Wimmer wrote:
> Hi Peter!
>
> Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
>> I don't have a strong preference really. A component feels a bit more
>> like a client because it is a local connection, plus c2s connections are
>> simpler than s2s connections. Let's pick one and be done with i
On Thursday 09 August 2007 8:03 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Hi Matthias! :)
>
> Matthias Wimmer wrote:
> > Hi Peter!
> >
> > Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
> >> I don't have a strong preference really. A component feels a bit more
> >> like a client because it is a local connection, plus c2s connect
On Aug 9, 2007, at 10:01 PM, Justin Karneges wrote:
There's an even bigger one: server connections can only send
stanzas in one
direction. Although that's more of a protocol thing than a schema
thing, if
you want to get picky. :)
This is a good enough reason for me, which is why I like ja
Ralph Meijer wrote:
> jabber:server and jabber:client both don't make much sense
> for component streams. I think we have a couple of choices here:
>
> 1. Use a separate namespace for the component streams.
> 2. Choose from jabber:server and jabber:client
> 3. Iff we do a new version of XMPP (i
I'm a bit torn about this, comments inline.
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 15:11 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 1:44 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> > > Version 0.1 of XEP-0225 (Component Connections) has been released.
> > >
> > > Abstract: Thi
Hello,
i am for jabber:client because i don't like the namespace switching in
software.
But this does not help that much if we stick with other namespaces on
s2s connections forever.
Alex
Hi Justin!
Justin Karneges schrieb:
I don't have a strong preference really. A component feels a bit more
like a client because it is a local connection, plus c2s connections are
simpler than s2s connections. Let's pick one and be done with it. :)
The reason why I for the most part suggest usin
Dnia 10-08-2007, pią o godzinie 10:26 +0200, Matthias Wimmer napisał(a):
> But I'd prefere to use 'jabber:server'. Even if have a bit of
> the expression, that people merely prefere 'jabber:client' just
> because
> more people seem to work on clients or client connections were they
> are
> more
Hello
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:19:59AM -0700, Justin Karneges wrote:
> > That said, all server implementations need to do this namespace juggling
> > anyway, so I don't see how it is an extra burden to do this for another
> > namespace, too.
>
> What doesn't sit well with me is this idea of the
On Friday 10 August 2007 12:20 am, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> My namespace handing code has None besides the typical empty and
> non-empty namespace names. None means inheriting from whatever is the
> default namespace of the parent (or closest ancestor that sets this. So,
> I convert the namespace to N
Hi Tomasz!
Tomasz Sterna schrieb:
Dnia 10-08-2007, pią o godzinie 10:26 +0200, Matthias Wimmer napisał(a):
But I'd prefere to use 'jabber:server'. Even if have a bit of
the expression, that people merely prefere 'jabber:client' just
because
more people seem to work on clients or client connect
19 matches
Mail list logo
