On 10/21/10 6:20 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2010/10/21 Daniel-Constantin Mierlamiconda@gmail.com:
Back to first paragraph. Are XMPP, MSN, Skype doing processing to these documents, or are they just pure storage systems for them with a white/black list access policy? In other words, I can publish my vcard and then tell the server if X ask for it, don't send my email address, just my web site address?
In both XMPP and MSN the avatar and vcard are retrieved by a watcher from the server if the watched gives the watcher permissions, so the server *does* interpret the permissions rules in behalf of the user. How to achieve this logic in a non-centralized architecture? I cannot imagine it.
Maybe is a misunderstanding here. Hope you haven't understood that there will no server involved and is kind of peer-to-peer network like skype.
But everything in the server is just routing to resources. Authorizations rules exist and we apply them for many years for voice calls. But we don't authorize typically the content (e.g., not allowed to speak Spanish on a call).
So, if we assume that the "server" must be active part on the subscription (it must interpret permissions and know about subscriptions) then, why to implement in other way (direct/end-to-end presence) presence status retrieval when the watched user is online? two mechanisms?
Interpreting the permission of routing to a resource (being it my vcard, voicemail, my phone, etc) is there and should be reused. With some phones you have DND on it, or with some services you have it in the server (managed via ivr or web or a special key on the (Snom) phone sending an update to server).
The problem right now is interpreting the content - presence information is content. If the server does not understand the Event you subscribe to, bye bye...
Cheers, Daniel