Actually with the current iq scheme, that's one thing that should be clarified:
Can the invisible iq be sent before initial presence? It seems that would need to be supported in order to not leak your presence when you first log on, otherwise a contact may see you come online momentarily and then go offline. -K On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Stefan Karlsson <s...@synergysky.com> wrote: > Silly question: > > Why not just have invisible as a presence mode, and remove the silly > enforced empty <presence/> at initialization? > > /stefan > > Peter Saint-Andre skrev 16/07/14 17:11: > > On 6/19/14, 9:30 PM, Lance Stout wrote: >> >>> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack >>>> or to clarify an existing protocol? >>>> >>> >>> This is a feature that has received a lot of end-user requests, and we >>> have no other good way to do it, so yes. >>> >>> If anyone is going to ever implement this feature, let's have a thought >>> out approach for them instead of horrible hacks. >>> >>> >>> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction >>>> and requirements? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, it does. >>> >>> >>> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, >>>> why not? >>>> >>> >>> I've implemented this twice already on the client side - in SleekXMPP >>> and stanza.io. >>> >>> However, I'm not aware of any server-side implementation to use those >>> with. >>> >> >> I've been talking about adding it to Prosody. :-) >> >> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? >>>> >>> >>> As mentioned in the XEP, it's still very easy to expose the fact that >>> you're online, but any method of accomplishing presence invisibility will >>> have that issue. >>> >> >> Yes, and this is one reason I don't like the entire concept of >> invisibility. >> >> However, as noted, if we're going to do invisibility (and users want it >> so clients will be written to support it), then let's at least have a >> reasonable protocol for it. >> >> One thing I notice not mentioned in the XEP is client handling of >>> bookmarks set to auto join. >>> >> >> Good point. I'll add a note about that. >> >> Peter >> >> >> >
