jdev - 2020-10-08

can disco#items use rsm?

is this its own XEP?

if yes i dont find it

ah its in 0059 described

lovetox, its underspecified

what part exactly flow?

Hmmmm, there's https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0059.html#examples

Zash does prosody support that?

Nope

lovetox, looks like I was wrong. I remebered the interaction with xep30 and xep59 to be underspecified, but that disco#items case (and the example) look straight forward

question is how to discover that a server supports rsm on disco items

because if i send a disco#items to conference.jabber.org with a rsm page size of say 50

i get ddos with 18000 items

because it does not support rsm ^

lovetox, I think edhelas is interested in disco + rsm

because apparently (pubsub) comment nodes are also huge

or something

lovetox, do you need to discover support for disco#info+rsm?

please don’t implement disco#items+rsm, I don’t want to (have to do it in the s.j.n code) :D

it appears to me the idea behind xep59 § 3 is that you do it opportunistically

Wouldn't it be opt-in?

Zash, how could it be not opt-in?

send <{disco#items}query><{rsm}set/></query>

as per the example

flow yes see my example above

right, I don't think you can do it any other way?

otherwise you get DDoS

so if you don't, either you get everything or a truncated result if the server really doesn't want to send everything

lovetox, but what is your plan b?

first you need to know that the result set is very large

which you may or may not know a priori ✏

plan b is not query disco#items

so you tell your users, sorry can't list

yes

either server advertises it, or i dont display a list

that was my idea

I mean I think there no reason that we don't recommend services to announce that they support disco#info+rsm

(of course we would have a discussion whether or note this announcement is recommended or required) ✏

There's no specific feature or pattern for this already tho?

Zash, pattern?

flow: eg writing "to announce support for disco+rsm, add <feature var=http:etc/disco#info+rsm}"

somewhere

Zash, yes that is what I had in mind, and I don't think we have that (yet)

hmm I have a private disco-rsm branch in my xeps/ repo

and I am pretty sure this was discussed before

flow: or rather, "to announce foo + rsm support, concantenate the feature with "+rsm" and announce that"~

that'd be a pattern

ahh yes, but at least for some foo+rsm you'd probably need to clarify in foo's xep how it would interact with rsm

fwiw I think this discussion also popped up when I added pubsub#rsm. And I don't know if I did remove the standalone rsm in disco (which doesn't make sense)

it would really be nice if i could query my own servers MUC list in a good way

i implement the interface to muclumbus but for mall company servers for example, it would be better to just disco#items

What if you had the muclumbus xmpp protocol to your local MUC?

Do we also need a similar system for say pubsub nodes, etc.

Zash would be fine, though a bit too much for my taste

hm Zash, no would be fine

lets make a XEP out of it :)

Like https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0433.html

i wonder why we not just used jabber search

https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0055.html

i see not much difference

or non at all

except some error are defined

but yeah Zash would be a nice addition in prosody :)

Does anyone implement this dataform thing: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0055.html#example-9

yes gajim i think

in the service discovery browser

<reported>?

yes

at least the last time i looked

lovetox, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0433.html#design re jabber search

i know only one server that has a user directory

zash

(Sorry, silly beta client, again) Zash: Yes, Swift and M-Link both do the data forms for that, unless I'm going mad.

(I can check in the morning for you if you want)

Kev: But including the <reported> stuff? I don't think I've ever seen that in action. Prosody doesn't support that part.

Oh. Uhm.

Zash, without the reported its invalid

the fields are encapsulated by <item>

Looks like Swift understands reported, at a glance.

and you only have this in reported data forms

thats not jabber search syntax

thats XEP0004

Yep, M-Link also sends reported for xep55 as far as I can see (without doing much research).

Kev: what beta client is this?

A heavy rework of Swift we're experimenting with.

ah, nice