Good news. In the mean time I'll go ahead with my small hack (fortunately, only a few lines of Erlang :)).
dan On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 4/12/11 1:33 PM, Daniel Dormont wrote: >> Hi folks, > > Howdy! > >> I'm developing an XMPP application that heavily uses MUC. I have a >> use case where I would specifically like an Admin to be able to send >> a private message to a Participant in the MUC, even if that Admin >> user is currently not an occupant of the room. XEP-0045 says this: >> >> "If the sender is not an occupant of the room in which the intended >> recipient is visiting, the service MUST return a <not-acceptable/> >> error to the sender." > > The intent is to thwart attacks from outside the room. But perhaps it's > acceptable for admins to be exempted from that rule. > >> and the specific XMPP server I'm using (ejabberd) implements this >> correctly. My question is, what's the reason for this rule? Is there >> another way to achieve the use case I'm interested in, short of >> hacking the code to take it out of compliance? > > The spec is currently (although slowly) being revised, and I think could > be relaxed on this point. > > Peter > > -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ > > >
