[jdev] S2S

[Jonathan Dickinson]

Sorry to be such a twat, but I have searched the specs for like .5hr in vain.

In S2S connections which of the following happens?

C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
S1->S2: <message xmlns="jabber:server"/> <!-- Server namespace -->
S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

Or

C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
S1->S2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/> <!-- Client namespace -->
S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

Or

C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
S1->S2: <route><message xmlns="jabber:client"/></route> <!-- or some other element -->
S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

Sorry to ask such a dumb question...

I am kind of hoping it is option 2 or 3.

-- Jonathan

_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 06/13/2008 5:28 AM, Jonathan Dickinson wrote:
> Sorry to be such a twat, but I have searched the specs for like .5hr in vain.
>
> In S2S connections which of the following happens?
>
> C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
> S1->S2: <message xmlns="jabber:server"/> <!-- Server namespace -->
> S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

Correct.

> Or
>
> C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
> S1->S2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/> <!-- Client namespace -->
> S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

Nope.

> Or
>
> C1->S1: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>
> S1->S2: <route><message xmlns="jabber:client"/></route> <!-- or some other element -->
> S2->C2: <message xmlns="jabber:client"/>

No! The <route/> element is used only for internal packet routing within
some XMPP server implementations. It is not for sending over the wire
between XMPP entities.

> Sorry to ask such a dumb question...

There are no dumb questions. Well, there are, but you don't tend to ask
them. :)

> I am kind of hoping it is option 2 or 3.

Sorry to disappoint you. The transformation from jabber:client to
jabber:server and back to jabber:client again is one of those ugly
aspects of XMPP, at least for server developers.

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________

[Jehan]

Sorry to disappoint you. The transformation from jabber:client to
jabber:server and back to jabber:client again is one of those ugly
aspects of XMPP, at least for server developers.

Peter


Hello,

ugly in which meaning? Simply because it is annoying for developpers? Or because you consider this is not such a good thing, or not very logical, or at least it could be better in your opinion?

Jehan

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 06/13/2008 8:51 AM, JabberForum wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre;988 Wrote:
>> Sorry to disappoint you. The transformation from jabber:client to
>> jabber:server and back to jabber:client again is one of those ugly
>> aspects of XMPP, at least for server developers.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>
> Hello,
>
> ugly in which meaning? Simply because it is annoying for developpers?
> Or because you consider this is not such a good thing, or not very
> logical, or at least it could be better in your opinion?

Because it is annoying for developers. Even if it could be better, I
don't think it will change until XMPP 2.0 (which will never happen).

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________

[Joe Hildebrand]

On Jun 13, 2008, at 8:51 AM, JabberForum wrote:

> Peter Saint-Andre;988 Wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to disappoint you. The transformation from jabber:client to
>> jabber:server and back to jabber:client again is one of those ugly
>> aspects of XMPP, at least for server developers.

> ugly in which meaning? Simply because it is annoying for developpers?
> Or because you consider this is not such a good thing, or not very
> logical, or at least it could be better in your opinion?

Ugly in that a given stanza, say a <message/>, changes namespace as it
traverses the system. It's illogical and semantically invalid for the
basic identity of our core delivery mechanisms to change on different
kinds of links. However, that's what we get for being one of the
early implementors of XML namespaces, when they were less well-
understood.

All of that being said, I wonder if there's some way we could
bootstrap ourselves out of this. For S2S streams that have restarts
(TLS or SASL) it would be pretty easy to define a new stream feature
or something that says that the receiving server implements using "jabber:client
" on S2S streams, so that jabber:client can be the default namespace
for the restarted stream.
_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________

[Jonathan Dickinson]

Thanks guys. Looks like I will have to do a NS transform on my readers/writers...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jdev-bounces (AT) jabber (DOT) org [mailto:jdev-bounces (AT) jabber (DOT) org] On Behalf Of
> Joe Hildebrand
> Sent: 13 June 2008 06:57 PM
> To: Jabber/XMPP software development list
> Subject: Re: [jdev] S2S
>
>
> On Jun 13, 2008, at 8:51 AM, JabberForum wrote:
>
> > Peter Saint-Andre;988 Wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry to disappoint you. The transformation from jabber:client to
> >> jabber:server and back to jabber:client again is one of those ugly
> >> aspects of XMPP, at least for server developers.
>
> > ugly in which meaning? Simply because it is annoying for developpers?
> > Or because you consider this is not such a good thing, or not very
> > logical, or at least it could be better in your opinion?
>
> Ugly in that a given stanza, say a <message/>, changes namespace as it
> traverses the system. It's illogical and semantically invalid for the
> basic identity of our core delivery mechanisms to change on different
> kinds of links. However, that's what we get for being one of the
> early implementors of XML namespaces, when they were less well-
> understood.
>
> All of that being said, I wonder if there's some way we could
> bootstrap ourselves out of this. For S2S streams that have restarts
> (TLS or SASL) it would be pretty easy to define a new stream feature
> or something that says that the receiving server implements using
> "jabber:client
> " on S2S streams, so that jabber:client can be the default namespace
> for the restarted stream.
> _______________________________________________
> JDev mailing list
> FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
> Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
> Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
> Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
> _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
FAQ: http://www.jabber.org/discussion-lists/jdev-faq
Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe (AT) jabber (DOT) org
_______________________________________________