Re: [APPS-REVIEW] Review request: draft-saintandre-jabberid-05.txt

On Fri Aug 24 01:52:46 2007, Scott Lawrence wrote:
> There are any number of possible 'other identifiers' that might be
> included in email (or HTTP or SIP) headers to identify the sender.  
> I
> suspect that identifiers for use in different protocols will all be
> URIs, which implies that they contain a scheme that identifies the
> protocol.  If there is a need for an email header that identifies an
> 'other identifier', then it seems to me that it would be better to 
> make
> it just that and let the scheme define the protocol.  Specify it 
> such
> that it can have multiple values:
> 
>  From-Alt-Uri: sip:scott@example.com, xmpp:scott@jabber.example.com
> 
> This seems more flexible and cleaner than defining a new header for 
> each
> possible identifier type just so that the scheme can be implied for 
> the
> type.

Absolutely - without this discussion, I can't really back Proposed 
Standard. However, Jabber-Id is a deployed mechanism, so it needs 
publication as-is. Therefore I'd say Informational.

FWIW, another point occured to me - which From address does this 
information pertain to? (Technically, a message may have multiple 
 From addresses. Perhaps this specification, and any From-Alt-Uri 
specification, should stipulate it's the Sender, not the From.)

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@cridland.net - xmpp:dwd@jabber.org
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

_______________________________________________
APPS-REVIEW mailing list
APPS-REVIEW@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review