Wed, 8 Feb 2017 08:19:17 +0000 Dave Cridland <d...@cridland.net> wrote:
> Right, I understand, and largely agree. I might scribble a draft to > address this, by clarifying what we really meant here. I see also two issues here ;) 1. RFC6120, section 7.1 says: > After a client authenticates with a server, it MUST bind a specific > resource to the stream so that the server can properly address the > client. Thus, a client is unable to resume a session in any case. 2. While almost everybody here argued that "resource binding" is any binding mechanism, including Bind2, RFC6120 clearly defines "resource binding": Section 7.3.1: > The parties to a stream MUST consider resource binding as mandatory- > to-negotiate. And section 7.1 defines: > The XML namespace name for the resource binding extension is > 'urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-bind'. In my book, "resource binding" is exactly something within 'urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-bind' namespace, unambiguously. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
