Re: draft-cridland-xmpp-session-00

A careful reading of RFC 3921 suggests that <session/> is itself optional -
if it's not there, it means you don't do it. So from a purely theoretical
standpoint, we were right to just drop it in 6121.

Unfortunately, it seems that existing clients (old versions of Smack, for
example) actually generate errors if it's not advertised, and in fairness,
it's not stand-out clear that <session/> wasn't mandatory for IM servers;
it certainly looks from 3921§C.1 that it's a requirement of XMPP (over
Jabber).


On 9 June 2014 17:22, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 6/9/14, 9:46 AM, Lance Stout wrote:
>
>> +1 for standardizing this. It's a pragmatic solution that lets us cut out
>> a round-trip during session startup without worrying about older servers.
>>
>
> +1, seems fine. That was the thinking behind RFC 6121 but it seems that we
> neglected to make the <optional/> flag explicit.
>
> Peter
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmpp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp
>

_______________________________________________
xmpp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp