-
singpolyma
Hmm, I wonder why pubsub#notification_type is part of the node configuration instead of the subscription configuration
-
nicoco
Is there any reason why the "XEP-0319: Last User Interaction in Presence" payload could not be included in an "unavailable" presence?
-
nicoco
Relatedly, are <status>es forbidden in "unavailable" presences?
-
MattJ
They are not foebidden✎ -
MattJ
They are not forbidden ✏
-
nicoco
OK, I thought so but I wonder if there was tribal knowledge about it that I should be aware of :). FWIW I'm asking because gajim parses neither the status nor the <idle> when ptype=unavailable, or at least it does not display it in the UI.✎ -
nicoco
OK, I thought so but I wondered if there was tribal knowledge about it that I should be aware of :). FWIW I'm asking because gajim parses neither the status nor the <idle> when ptype=unavailable, or at least it does not display it in the UI. ✏
-
lovetox
does the server store extended infos in an unavailable presence?
-
MattJ
I don't know about current implementations, for example Prosody does not (though probably there is a plugin...). I know that in the past some servers definitely did.
-
MattJ
It was possible to sign off with a status like "on vacation", and your contacts would see it while you were offline
-
MattJ
With the shift to everyone being online all of the time, that became relatively uncommon of course
-
mjk
splitting '478 hairs here... what if a server advertizes max-bytes < 10000? assume max-bytes == 10000? ignore it? </stream>? dos the server until it's fixed?
-
Zash
Undefined Behavior, here be dragons, dunno
-
pep.
Why would 10000 be a special value when the server can advertize its maximum?
-
Zash
I suppose it would be best to respect that.
-
Zash
Like, what are you supposed to do if max-bytes = 1
-
mjk
pep.: the RFC says so 🤷
-
pep.
mjk, extensions do many things that aren't in the RFC :)
-
Zash
XEPs can override what the RFC says, so eh.
-
mjk
> XEPs can override what the RFC says, so eh. what a blasphemt✎ -
Zash
Doing so without some kind of negotiation is meh tho
-
mjk
> XEPs can override what the RFC says, so eh. what a blasphemy ✏
-
Zash
And this is advertising, rather than negotiation, if there's such a distinction
-
mjk
right
-
Zash
What are the options anyway? Ignore, get </stream>, vs respect and maybe not work right?
-
Zash
Best to respect the RFC when it says > A _deployed_ server's maximum stanza size MUST NOT be smaller than 10000 bytes
-
pep.
Why would a server advertize 1 anyway? What would that achieve apart from not being able to communicate
-
Zash
Because silly admin configures it that way?
-
pep.
Yeah and they'll realize sooner or later that their users can't use the service
-
pep.
I'd rather have it fail explicitely this way than ignore the issue and let the admin believe their config is alright
-
Zash
Does the XEP need to forbid such configuration/deployment?
-
Zash
I don't remember any text explicitly saying that you're free to advertise max-bytes <10k, the RFC says don't put the limit there, so one could argue that that shouldn't happen.
-
pep.
I guess you can SHOULD/RECOMMEND a minimum value (same as the RFC?) But if there's a way for servers to advertize their max limit I'd vote for respecting it
-
mjk
tl;di (too long, didn't implement)
-
cal0pteryx (wurstsalat)
0060 ?