Am 02.02.2014 21:53, schrieb Florian Zeitz:
On 02.02.2014 11:39, Alexander Holler wrote:
Am 02.02.2014 09:23, schrieb Waqas Hussain:
Using the server's hostname in this case is still a bug though.
RFC3920 was vague, but RFC6120 is quite clear on this. Even before
6120's publication this was the consensus (which led to 6120
clarifying it).
In a c2s connection, the default address of the 'c' side is the
connection's full JID, while of the 's' side is the user's bare JID.
No. for me, and as it looks, some other server authors, the obvious
content of a missing 'to' is the direct communcation partner to which
the stanza is send to.
If you have a c2s connection and the client sends a stanza without 'to'
(client -> server), it is for sure not obvious that the client itself is
the what the missing 'to' should be.
And if you change the RFC, you can't blame servers as the changed RFC
made them non-compliant.
Okay, I don't blame you. Now go *update* your server to the current
version of the RFC, which has been out for quite some time.
Your complaints about this clarification in the RFC is really more than
just a bit late.
It wasn't a complain, I've just explained why servers do behave
different than the current RFC says. I had the impression several people
seem to not know that there was a quiet different RFC before 6120 and
most servers were created long time ago.
Anyway, I think it's better I don't say anything more. (And to make you
happy: I don't intend to change my server).
Alexander Holler
