XMPP, Connect Server, and SRV

[Mark Doliner]

2008/8/9 Evan Schoenberg <evan.s at dreskin.net>:
> On Aug 8, 2008, at 1:18 PM, Stu Tomlinson wrote:
>
> If I'm understanding this correctly, you want usernames of
> 'evan at adiumx.com' and domain of 'pidgin.im', which produces a full JID
> of 'evan at adiumx.com@pidgin.im/Resource' - this, I believe, is a valid
> JID, and would work using pidgin.im SRV records *IF* our usersplits
> weren't broken in such a way as to prevent this working at the moment.
>
> The fix is to make our usersplits support that form of JID and not to
> muck about doing SRV lookups on the connect server.
>
> No, I'm saying a username of 'evan' with a domain of 'adiumx.com' on the
> XMPP server running at xmpp.pidgin.im, when the SRV record of pidgin.im for
> XMPP points to xmpp.pidgin.im.
> This is primarily relevant on a non-federated Jabber server, since obviously
> with federation it would be unclear where a message to evan at adiumx.com
> should be routed.  That's okay, though; nothing in the XMPP spec requires
> that servers be federated.
> The Connect Server points to the server which should be used.  RFC-3920
> section 14.3 [1] indicates that the SRV service should be used to resolve
> the server before IPv4/IPv6 address record resolution is used.  I don't see
> why this should be limited to being followed when the server is implied via
> the JID; shouldn't we follow this regardless of how the server is specified
> (JID-implication or connect server)?
> Cheers,
> Evan
> [1] http://www.xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc3920.html#rfc.section.14.3

So the user's jid is "evan at adiumx.com"?  Why would it matter what the
SRV record is for pidgin.im?  Couldn't you set the SRV record of
adiumx.com to point to xmpp.pidgin.im?  Or set the connect server to
xmpp.pidgin.im?

Doing an SRV record lookup on the connect server doesn't seem like a
good idea to me.  The connect server is kind of an ugly workaround for
people who don't have the ability to use SRV records for whatever
reason.  Doing an SRV lookup on that seems like it could cause
confusion.

-Mark

-Mark