Re: [Simple] SIMPLE and OMA and 3Gpp and RCS and… (new subject)

[Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[e-mail]>]

On Nov 2, 2012, at 11:46 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:

> 2012/11/2 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[e-mail]>:
>> - Having a oma pres-rules document which just points to a resource-lists document means that we can no longer get the policy for a watcher by just looking at pre-rules. This makes me think that we need a single document to store a buddy-list, which also contains the  policy for each buddy.
> 
> SO what I say and repeat 1000 times: authorization MUST be an
> *attribute* of each buddy. Period. Drop "users lists" named
> "allowed-buddies" / "blocked-buddies", that's not the way to go.
> 

And when did I say otherwise? :-O

> buddylist:
> --------------------
> sip:[e-mail] {
>  presence-subscribe-to: true,
>  presence-allowed: true,
>  presence-blocked: false
> }
> 
> sip:[e-mail] {
>  presence-subscribed-to: true,
>  presence-allowed: true,
>  presence-blocked: true
> }
> --------------------
> 
> And that's all. This is easy to render for the watcher and easy to
> process for the server. Single "document" with buddies and their
> attributes.
> 
> No need for "external references to other XCAP documents in any other
> server in the world", no need for generating a coredump if the same
> buddy is contained in "oma_my_buddies" list and "my_blocked_contacts"
> list and "oma_PoC_contacts" list and "oma_featured_buddies" list.
> 

This is what we did in our addressbook implementation, while maintaining compatibility to the highest possible degree.

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects