XMPP, Connect Server, and SRV
pidgin at monitzer.com
Fri Oct 17 07:47:01 EDT 2008
On Oct 17, 2008, at 13:32, Sebastiaan Deckers wrote:
> I don't see how xmpp-client SRV lookups of a user provided hostname
> "break the concepts of XMPP." In fact it seems logical to do that.
I was talking about you mis-using the host part or the JID as an
arbitrary field. The proper XMPP way to do this would be "billg
\40microsoft.com@<xmpp service name>". It's up to the client to
display the escape sequences appropriately (I'm not sure pidgin does
that right now).
>> Mind you, it's fine that you implement it that way as long as you
>> keep it a walled garden, but adding support for your private
>> changes to the protocol shouldn't be part of an official XMPP plugin.
> Again, I don't really know about Pidgin's source code or how
> complicated it is for libpurple developers to make SRV lookups.
DNS lookups are asynchronous, so this might actually really add some
complications (although I don't know the code in question at all).
> But frankly that doesn't matter at all in designing the XMPP
> specification. The XSF is a standards foundation, not a software
> foundation, and therefore there is no "official" reference
IIRC that host field is not part of the specification at all. It's
there as a tribute to misconfigured or broken domain name servers,
which are far too common nowadays.
>> btw, A records allow load balancing, too (just weights are not
>> supported I think).
> Sure, but SRV is more elegant as it makes the load balancing
> specifically for XMPP services and not a blanket A-record which
> would affect other services on that domain.
Just use a "xmpp." prefix for the name (making it a separate A record)
and you don't have that issue.
More information about the Devel