IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [xmpp] draft-cridland-xmpp-session-00

Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu> Tue, 10 June 2014 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <ralphm@ik.nu>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91A21A0291 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 01:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kKuVdjqSHQ3Y for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 01:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mag.ik.nu (mag.ik.nu [IPv6:2001:16f8:4::61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A17631A01B3 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 01:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mag.ik.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mag.ik.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87401A1021 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:44:01 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ik.nu
Received: from mag.ik.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by mag.ik.nu (mag.ik.nu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id ZH5saoeRXJJw for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:44:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.3.215] (s53751670.adsl.online.nl [83.117.22.112]) by mag.ik.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2F24A100F for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:44:00 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <5396C550.8060909@ik.nu>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:44:00 +0200
From: Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: xmpp@ietf.org
References: <CAKHUCzwJrykJrOscQowXOKZY1Aq7MA+YRWz=XanDknY+7zq6qg@mail.gmail.com> <B97418EC-47DF-439E-85C2-835761F6D694@andyet.net> <5395DF40.2030509@stpeter.im> <292F40A9-A302-477B-AF26-57B1D3024BEC@mumbo.ca> <CAKHUCzyoB04UM63afZctwsCTRKCs=WJ_DjSZrS4Vw8w3iqUarg@mail.gmail.com> <557B118B-21BE-43FD-905A-9B725836E66F@mumbo.ca> <CAKHUCzyamFr6LAk0B+fkdvFg7hoapakNj0bJ9yKPFTd3sET52Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAOb_FnzePrYr++b8r2oCS07eLCB7R0kuFmY2wkqZB=M8SEP0Vw@mail.gmail.com> <5396C131.8030508@ik.nu> <CAOb_FnxHhbxDB2He8c1F=ZSGQecYa2fgwSUPL7=p9oweZ9S8Nw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOb_FnxHhbxDB2He8c1F=ZSGQecYa2fgwSUPL7=p9oweZ9S8Nw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/TyOT0PglcpSMOxTtRNmEWUlxn6o
Subject: Re: [xmpp] draft-cridland-xmpp-session-00
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:44:04 -0000

On 2014-06-10 10:33, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Ralph Meijer <ralphm@ik.nu> wrote:
> [..]
>> I disagree. Clients only need to implement this if they want to benefit
>> from the removal of a roundtrip with servers advertising this flag.
> 
> 'this' in this case being session establishment, not optional.

Well, yeah:

 1) (New) clients need to implement negotiating Session Establishment to
interact with servers that advertise Session Establishment, but only if
advertized.

 2) Clients may have to negotiate Session Establishment to work around
broken servers that don't advertise, but do require it to be negotiated.
I hope this is never the case, though. If there are such implementations
in the wild, I hope to have them fixed *and* implement this draft.

 3) Clients already supporting Session Establishment, SHOULD (per the
upcoming version of this draft) skip negotiating Session Establishment.


> [..]
>> I'm not sure what you mean here. To be sure, this flag is only being
>> defined for this namespace / stream feature.
> 
> Yes. I think this is worth being explicit about.

Agreed.


-- 
ralphm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email