Re: [sixpac] SIP AOR/GRUU discovery for offline XMPP contacts.

[Emil Ivov <[e-mail]>]

На 17.03.11 21:46, Peter Saint-Andre написа:
> On 3/17/11 2:07 PM, Emil Ivov wrote:
>>
>>
>> На 17.03.11 20:07, Peter Saint-Andre написа:
>>> On 3/11/11 1:44 AM, Emil Ivov wrote:
>>>> Hey Simo,
>>>>
>>>> На 11.03.11 08:43, [e-mail] написа:
>>>>>> Would it make sense to also allow uploading and retrieving that
>>>>>> kind of information within a vCard? Of course, if available,
>>>>>> information in a presence or a message stanza should always take
>>>>>> precedence.
>>>>>
>>>>> This approach might be most straightforward. See
>>>>> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0054.html which I believe will be
>>>>> superseded by http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0292.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, I was also thinking about them and I guess all that we need to do
>>>> is indicate the elements where the AOR/GRUU would need to be stored and
>>>> retrieved from.
>>>
>>> Would we use the vCard4 IMPP property for this?
>>
>> Syntax-wise it looks right. Semantically RFC 4770 seems to be declaring
>> it as an IM or a presence address only.
>>
>> So I am wondering if this could be source of confusion for non-sixpac
>> clients.
>>
>> An example on page 2 seems to explicitly point that a SIP uri would be
>> used for SIMPLE chats and presence, and it is my understanding that most
>> sixpac clients would be unreachable this way.
> 
> You have a point.
> 
> Perhaps the TEL property is appropriate, instead:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-16#section-6.4.1

It seems to come with a "*" cardinality so how would one distinguish
between the sixpac SIP uri and the regular phones? Do we define a new
scheme?

Also, I am not sure how to read the following:

    It is expected that the URI scheme will be "tel", as
    specified in [RFC3966]

Does this mean that use with URI other than "tel" should be avoided?

Emil