Re: [Stox] Review on -presence

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Thu, 01 August 2013 07:42 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.com>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E21D21F8EB2 for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 00:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.825
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.825 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FehBGQo8f4AK for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 00:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node06.dns-hosting.info [85.17.186.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B77721F9D21 for <stox@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 00:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id F2F0CB35DF; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 09:42:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from dhcp-152d.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-152d.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.21.45]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5585EB017A; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 09:42:40 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Sa=FAl_Ibarra_Corretg=E9?= <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <51F99063.30203@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 09:42:43 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <27D924F2-799E-48DB-9D07-52383BD530C8@ag-projects.com>
References: <0CB65FBA-7262-4189-8852-5FC08A34D50D@ag-projects.com> <51F99063.30203@stpeter.im>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: "stox@ietf.org" <stox@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Stox] Review on -presence
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP-TO-XMPP Working Group discussion list <stox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/stox>
List-Post: <mailto:stox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:42:48 -0000

> 
>> Also, the priority in PIDF is a
>> float between 0 and 1, is it the same for XMPP?
> 
> Hmm. We had text about that in RFC 3922, and I suggest we copy that to
> this draft (adjusting as necessary)...
> 
>   An XMPP presence stanza MAY contain a <priority/> child element whose
>   value is an integer between -128 and +127.  The value of this element
>   MAY be mapped to the 'priority' attribute of the <contact/> child of
>   the PIDF <tuple/> element.  If the value of the XMPP <priority/>
>   element is negative, an XMPP-CPIM gateway MUST NOT map the value. The
>   range of allowable values for the PIDF 'priority' attribute is any
>   decimal number from zero to one inclusive, with a maximum of three
>   decimal places.  If an XMPP-CPIM gateway maps these values, it SHOULD
>   treat XMPP <priority>0</priority> as PIDF priority='0' and XMPP
>   <priority>127</priority> as PIDF priority='1', mapping intermediate
>   values appropriately so that they are unique (e.g., XMPP priority 1
>   to PIDF priority 0.007, XMPP priority 2 to PIDF priority 0.015, and
>   so on up through mapping XMPP priority 126 to PIDF priority 0.992;
>   note that this is an example only, and that the exact mapping shall
>   be determined by the XMPP-CPIM gateway).
> 
> That's twice in one day I have looked at RFC 3922. ;-)
> 

Heh :-) I agree, that text would clarify this.

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects