-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 418
MSC4156: Migrate server_name to via #4156
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
d4c58a9
5a97bc2
fe3e01e
ae3677c
0a8e6e1
ae4e79c
7b3a7b3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ | ||
| # MSC4156: Migrate `server_name` to `via` | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just wanted to say that this sounds to me like a sensible idea to try to standardise terminology in this case to make everyones lives easier. Thanks for this very sensible proposal. |
||
|
|
||
| Room IDs in Matrix are generally not routable on their own. In the [room ID grammar] `!opaque_id:domain`, | ||
| the `domain` is the server that created the room. There is, however, no guarantee that this server is | ||
| still joined to the room at a later time. Therefore, room IDs don't provide a reliable resident server | ||
| to send requests to. Critically, the `domain` is not to be used as a routing server. It is purely a namespace. | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is nice but honestly, for next time, I think it's unnecessary. I think it's fair to assume the audience is already familiar with the problem.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. having the detail in the introduction I think is important, but agreed the phrasing is slightly off here. Not all readers will have context on the problem, particularly when it's a bit of obscure spec. |
||
|
|
||
| The spec partially addresses this issue by defining a [`via`] query parameter on room URIs that can be | ||
| used to list servers that have a high probability of being in the room in the distant future. Additionally, | ||
| some APIs such as [`/_matrix/client/v3/join/{roomIdOrAlias}`] can take a `server_name` query parameter | ||
| that has the same effect as `via`. | ||
|
|
||
| The terminology difference between `server_name` and `via` can be slightly confusing which is why this | ||
| proposal attempts to standardize on `via`. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Proposal | ||
|
|
||
| The `server_name` query parameter on [`/_matrix/client/v3/join/{roomIdOrAlias}`] and | ||
| [`/_matrix/client/v3/knock/{roomIdOrAlias}`] is deprecated and a new parameter `via: [string]` is | ||
| introduced. | ||
|
|
||
| Clients SHOULD use `via` when the homeserver they're talking to supports it. To do this, they MAY either | ||
| detect server support through the supported spec versions in [`/_matrix/client/versions`] or always include | ||
| both parameters (with identical values). | ||
|
|
||
| Homeservers MUST ignore all `server_name` parameters if any `via` parameters are supplied. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Potential issues | ||
|
|
||
| As with any migration, some effort will be required to update client and server implementations. Additionally, | ||
| while the transitions isn't completed, the concurrent existence of both query parameters might lead to further | ||
| confusion. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Alternatives | ||
|
|
||
| None other than accepting status quo. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Security considerations | ||
|
|
||
| A client that supplies different `via` and `server_name` parameters could be served a different room depending | ||
| on which set of parameters the server uses to resolve the room ID. Tricking a client into doing this seems very | ||
| difficult though because [Matrix URIs], for instance, only have a single documented `via` parameter. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Unstable prefix | ||
|
|
||
| Until this proposal is accepted into the spec, implementations SHOULD refer to `via` as `org.matrix.msc4156.via`. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Dependencies | ||
|
|
||
| None. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| [Matrix URIs]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.11/appendices/#matrix-uri-scheme | ||
| [room ID grammar]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/appendices/#room-ids | ||
| [`via`]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/appendices/#routing | ||
| [`/_matrix/client/v3/join/{roomIdOrAlias}`]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3joinroomidoralias | ||
| [`/_matrix/client/v3/knock/{roomIdOrAlias}`]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3knockroomidoralias | ||
| [`/_matrix/client/versions`]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#get_matrixclientversions | ||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.