> The only thing I see as potentially being problematic then for implementors > is that whilst a Jingle session is active, the session can potentially be > renegotiated - is this something that's a candidate for being made optional?
I always assumed that you can implement any Jingle subset you wanted in a client, as long as you can make the application work. If an entity wants to do something fancy like renegotiation, then it has to be able to deal with an 'unsupported' error from the other side; if the client feels it was necessary, then it can always stop the stream (or negotiate a new one with the new parameters from scratch, which is obviously suboptimal). However, in my limited understanding of Jingle, I don't think many use cases (e.g. file transfer) of Jingle require renegotiation (or am I wrong?) cheers, Remko
