On 8/8/11 5:27 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:25 +0100, Kevin Smith wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Waqas Hussain wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
> support my e
On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 12:19 +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am 07.08.2011 19:27, schrieb Waqas Hussain:
> > On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>
> > XMPP errors always come from the JID the stanza was sent to, not from
> > the entity which actually generated the error
On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:25 +0100, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Waqas Hussain wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> >>> Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
> >>> support my expectation that they are sent from the JID
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Waqas Hussain wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>> Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
>>> support my expectation that they are sent from the JID the original
>>> presence was sent to. That'd mean that eithe
Hello,
Am 07.08.2011 19:27, schrieb Waqas Hussain:
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
XMPP errors always come from the JID the stanza was sent to, not from
the entity which actually generated the error. An obvious example is
Exactly, RFC 6120 defines this in section 8.3.1.
On Sun Aug 7 16:40:30 2011, Ralph Meijer wrote:
On Sun, 2011-08-07 at 09:31 +0100, Kevin Smith wrote:
> > Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems
to
> > support my expectation that they are sent from the JID the
original
> > presence was sent to. That'd mean that eith
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>> Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
>> support my expectation that they are sent from the JID the original
>> presence was sent to. That'd mean that either the spec is wrong or all
>> implementations are.
>
> 100%
On Sun, 2011-08-07 at 09:31 +0100, Kevin Smith wrote:
> > Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
> > support my expectation that they are sent from the JID the original
> > presence was sent to. That'd mean that either the spec is wrong or all
> > implementations are.
>
> Anecdotal evidence from different service implementations seems to
> support my expectation that they are sent from the JID the original
> presence was sent to. That'd mean that either the spec is wrong or all
> implementations are.
100% of the servers that I tested this against (sample size: 1)
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been reviewing the code in the branch for MUC client support in
> Wokkel against XEP-0045. I noticed that the examples for error
> conditions in reply to room join and status and nick change presences
> are sent from the room JID,
Hi,
I've been reviewing the code in the branch for MUC client support in
Wokkel against XEP-0045. I noticed that the examples for error
conditions in reply to room join and status and nick change presences
are sent from the room JID, instead from the occupant JID the presence
(change) was sent to.
11 matches
Mail list logo
