[jdev] Figuring out what a client thinks its JID is

[Paul Aurich]

And Aaron Kryptokos spoke on 03/31/2010 02:50 AM, saying:
> Basically, our user instructions for broken clients is to log using
> their authentication username as the node in their JID, which is the
> only way to make many popular clients (such as Pidgin) work.  The
> problem we encounter is that most of these clients will operate in a
> reduced-functionality mode, because the client is unable to recognize
> stanzas that are directed to them if they have a 'to' attribute.

Pidgin does indeed not have the ability to differentiate authcid and
authzid (although I'm considering adding it based on the recent discussions
in the XMPP WG).  However, see below.

> One way to work around these clients is to perform translation on the
> 'to' attribute to whatever the client thinks its JID is.  The problem
> with this is the client never actually tells the server what it thinks
> its JID is.  Ideally, clients would always assume the JID that the
> server provides in resource binding, but in practice, most do not do
> this correctly.

Are you actually experiencing Pidgin/Finch/Adium/libpurple operating in
"reduced functionality mode"?   I'm absolutely sure that all recent
versions (and as far back as 2.2.0, which is where I got tired of checking)
of libpurple /do/ pick up their full JID from the <bind/> response (and
AFAIK, this works correctly, because it's used for Google Talk with
gmail.com|googlemail.com).

If you are experiencing issues with Pidgin in this environment, could you
explicate?  What features don't work when the usernames don't match?

Thanks,
~Paul



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://www.jabber.org/jdev/attachments/20100405/7479dd9d/attachment.pgp>