Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: End-to-End Encrypted Contacts Metadata

On 20 Jan 2026, at 11:12, Goffi <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Le mardi 20 janvier 2026, 11:56:12 heure normale d’Europe centrale Kevin Smith 
> a écrit :
> 
>> I don’t think this is true. We do know that there are rosters in the wild
> that are large enough to realistically be limited by pubsub item/stanza size 
> limits. I don’t like one-item-per-item at all, but I don’t think one-item-per-
> roster is viable.
>> 
>> /K
> 
> I was hesitating to allow several <contact> elements per roster as I've said 
> earlier in this thread. This has the advantage of decoupling the number of 
> pubsub items from the number of contacts, and letting the client decide how 
> many contacts to store in one item (which can be a full roster for small 
> ones). This, in addition to the <reserved> element, would totally blur the 
> number of contacts from the server.
> 
> Would this be an acceptable solution?

Sorry, I used my words carelessly. I don’t think one item per roster is viable, for large rosters, so I think we should not do this. I don’t *like* one item per item, but I can’t give a reason that it’s bad and that’s not a reason to not do it.

FWIW, we have existing precedent of one pubsub item per roster item in MDS, written by a Daniel Gultsch :)

/K
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]