Old thread alert! On 1/31/12 2:07 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote: > On 01/31/2012 05:54 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> At its meeting on December 20, 2011, the XMPP Council agreed to >> issue a "Call for Experience" regarding XEP-0047 (In-Band >> Bytestreams), in preparation for perhaps advancing this >> specification from Draft to Final in the XSF's standards process. >> To help the Council decide whether this XEP is ready to advance to >> a status of Final, the Council would like to gather the following >> information: >> >> 1. What software has implemented XEP-0047? Please note that the >> protocol must be implemented in at least two separate codebases >> (and preferably more). > > I have tested XEP-47 implementations in tkabber and Vacuum-IM. Also, > I have my own implementation in my experimental library named > "twilix" which is an high level wrapper on top of twisted library. > This implementation is used now to pass attachments to my > experimental microblogging platform implementation (named LiJ) which > based on XEP-277. The source code of the implementation is placed > here: > https://github.com/xamvz/twilix/blob/master/twilix/bytestreams/ibb/base.py
Thanks for letting us know! >> 2. Have developers experienced any problems with the protocol as >> defined in XEP-0047? If so, please describe the problems and, if >> possible, suggested solutions. > > The only problem I remember with the XEP is in this paragraph: > >> The base64-encoded data to be sent, prior to any wrapping in the >> <data/> element and IQ or message stanza, MUST NOT be larger than >> the 'block-size' determined in the bytestream negotiation. > > It's not clear for me when I have to check the length of the block: > for raw data or for base64 encoded? In the last case it's hard to do > such encoding. I implemented the last case for the first time but > then I noticed that Vacuum-IM checks it for raw data and so my > implementation said that Vacuum-IM sends inappropriate packets, so > for now I am checking a raw data. Maybe it will be good to specify > this thing more clearly. Well, the spec says that the length restriction applies to the base64-encoded data, so I think we meant that this does *not* apply to the raw data. However, you seem to be saying that this might be difficult to implement. Have other folks experienced this problem? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
