XMPP Council - 2013-06-26

I'm flat out, and have no hope of following up with Council actions, or an agenda, before this afternoon.

Is there a meeting as usual?

I need to not use a fixed resource

Seems I was a ghost here, but poezio just let me know I was receiving unexpected messages

:)

Doesn't really answer my question, though.

I've no idea what your question was :)

I see no room history

for some reason

I'm flat out, and have no hope of following up with Council actions, or an agenda, before this afternoon. Kev @ 13:44 Is there a meeting as usual? 13:44

I think poezio has hidden it

I'm not sure that answered the question either :p

Well, I assume there is and I'll try and be here, although timing is going to be even tighter than usual.

I may need to consider asking to move Council a little in the future.

yes, there is a meeting today

brb

back

it looks like we're missing a Kev

well, lacking the attention of a Kev (-:

hehe

You can get one on Amazon, I think.

but don't get one of the used ones

of course not!

it also looks like we're lacking the attention of a MattJ

Yeah, you want a new one, not the dodgy ones on Marketplace.

I'm here now

and we're missing a Ralphm

I'm here.

I dropped MattJ a mail saying I was going to be 5mins late.

is Ralph on holiday?

he was the only person I had the address of in my phone.

I don't recall

We don't actually have anything to discuss today though, do we?

http over XMPP

Other than a shedload of outstanding stuff from last week, probably, that I've not even got to opening the mail of.

color field type

haha

Kev, Basically we can fill you in on what happened last week.

Kev, We volunteered you for lots of stuff when you weren't looking. ;-)

TL;DR — you are now responsible for deciding our future with Jingle

and the rest of the Free World™®

heehee

Excellent.

I feel suitably qualified for this responsibility.

we thought you would

(-:

I have, after all, used Fippo's web demo thing.

also, you're now XEP Editor, reporting to stpeter

Excellent, I see no problems with that either.

Anything else?

Kev, My kitchen

oh, and I'm now Executive Director Emeritus, you're in charge!

... needs mopping.

ok ok ok

in all seriousness

http://dibbledabblesdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/i-want-the-moon-on-a-stick.png

1) we formed a SIG to determine how media ought to be signaled in the future

2) Peter isn't able to keep up, and was to report to us (council? board?) on what he thinks we can do about it

m&m, Well, you guys agreed to form a SIG; I'm awaiting Kev's input there before claiming we've actually formed it.

I assume this is in the minutes and I just need to find sufficient time to read some of my mail from the last week and vote on stuff.

Kev: yes, but since we having a low latency connection to you now ...

right

True enough.

Dave Cridland: fair point

OK, let's find that mail as I have 30mins assigned to Council now anyway.

Oh, that's surprising. Still on my first page.

heh

5.3) SIG sounds like a good idea.

I have a significant interest in this, albeit little useful knowledge.

Kev, Happy with me as chair? Not that I have a *clue* what a SIG chair ought to be doing, so I'll make that one up on the fly if there's nothing in bylaws or XEPs about it.

5.2) I suspect having a nominated XEP Editor, but a team of minions who just get on and do stuff would be sensible, and have editor@ be an alias to go to several (Possibly including Council Chair).

Dave Cridland, I don't think anyone else is really clear, so you get to decide what to do

Dave Cridland: Getting a Rough Consensus™ opinion and reporting it to Council. That's about as far as it goes, I think.

essentially hearding cats

herding

And yes, You're welcome to herd as many cats as you wish.

Kev, And on (5.2), my concern would be ensuring that Peter is happy both delegating tasks and similarly herding the resultant cats.

Peter gets to say what he wants, I just have an opinion on what would be sensible.

I've been causing delays, so it might be reasonable to have a triumvirate of folks who can do things like push new proposals to the inbox

stpeter: that sounds reasonable, and I'm happy with whatever collection of individuals you decide on

5.1 - I thought we had approved Color Forms. HTTP I'll need to review again, I haven't read the new version yet.

But if they're not on the agenda for today, I guess that's next week anyway.

I'd suggest that the micro-editor folks should not be council, and ideally should be relatively new blood in order to pull some new faces into this end of the XSF.

stpeter: Any reason for a triumvirate, other than it being a fun word?

no :-)

Kev, It may be his Word Of The Day. Last week it was "Atramentous".

Well, I have no idea what the meaning of that is to know if he's misusing it :)

Ah. My dictionary claims it doesn't exist. I feel vindicated.

ok, any action items here? Kev, did you have opinions on SoX?

Kev: the solution to that is, get a better dictionary

stpeter: I'd have thought SoX it would be sensible to hold off while the Special Group Of Daves form opinions.

Kev: so I take it you're -1 on publishing as a XEP, then :-)

I'd rather not, but can be talked around if people feel I'm being unreasonable

it's one input to the SIG

other proposals might emerge, I'd think

kev: sox is different from the whole jingle topic

fippo: Is it, though?

kev: if you read it, that is even what the authors say

fippo, I think given that it's a VOIP thing, it's certainly related to some degree.

fippo: The preamble says about needing to do it because you can't map the SDP inside a browser to Jingle. That seems quite heavily related.

right. i do think that sox is very useful for dealing with sip hardware (deskphones)

and i don't think jingle will ever be successful there

It'd be nice to see if we could address this.

is this an official meeting or just bringing kev up to date?

It's an official meeting.

Although we've moved into getting Kev up to date, what we're discussing seems pertinent.

Unless people would like us to officially finish and carry on post-meeting.

0.o

I have a small question before you finish

So, I'm largely of the opinion that before pushing out more XEPs about the interaction between SIP/SDP/Jingle or just VOIP in general, we should see what the Band Of Daves have to say.

Unless someone has a pressing technical or political reason to publish SOX now.

Peter Waher: Shoot

stpeter: maybe joe has to give kev the talk he gave us in brussels ;-)

if the color field type xep has been approved, is it possible to assign it a number?

Also a small comment: I've addressed all comments and suggestions in the HTTP over XMPP XEP. It would be nice to be able to move it to Experimental

Kev, just asking since i didn't see roll call and stuff

when you're ready

fippo: yeah

Peter Waher: If I'm right, and no-one objected, we can give it a number. For HTTP it needs another vote.

thanks

Oh, I owe comments on RTT too, for the LC. Bother.

|-:

Peter Waher: I think you're correct about the color spec, let's check the history here....

Ah, I see that stpeter did publish the new http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/http-over-xmpp.html - I just didn't notice it inside another thread.

Kev: yes

That's one to vote on next week, then.

Anyway, we're at time.

Tobias: m&m called Roles at the start.

Date of next meeting?

I'm going to be continually late from now on if we keep them at 15:00, I think.

Moving somewhere 15:15 or 15:30 would be much easier for me.

Kev, ahh..didn't notice it then...nvm

at http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/council/2013-June/003716.html I see: > 3) ProtoXEP: Data Forms - Color Field Type < http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/color-parameter.html > > Accept as Experimental? > > RM, TM, MW have no objections. MM has objections (prefixing of XEP-0122 elements). Author(s) to submit a revision correcting XEP-0122 use. > KS have one fortnight to note objections. (KEV:) Not relevant as MM has blocked.

m&m: were your concerns addressed?

yes, and I said as much on one of the lists

I responded to the standards list and MM revoked his objection

Ah, yes. I didn't have objections to this.

I can't do 15:30

I can probably do 15:00

MattJ: 15:00 is what we do now.

MattJ, UTC.

That is so

anything at 16:00 or later is too difficult for me

would another day work better for your gentlemen?

My gentlemen would be ok with another day

they said

Pretty much any time in the work week other than 14:00 to 15:15 on a Wednesday would probably be fine for me.

My gentlemen do not exist, but my hooligans think Monday or Thursday works fine

Is there anyone that couldn't do it if we simply moved it back (later) 15mins?

+15 is fine with me

Peter Waher: verified at http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2013-June/027640.html

None of the 'can't do' above covered this, I think.

When's the Board meeting these days?

15:15 would overlap other meetings I have

Dave Cridland: Nonexistent? :)

m&m: even if Council is 15 minutes? ;-)

Kev, Ah.

+15 wfm

How about 15:10, and keep it to 20mins?

IFF council were switched to a 15 minute meeting, then I think it would usually work

I'm only ever so slightly not able to make 15:00, 10mins would cover it.

Regarding color field type: http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2013-June/027640.html

15:10 works for me

Peter Waher: Yes, stpeter linked that a few minutes ago.

saw that too late :)

OK. Let's go for 15:10 and hope I can be less rubbish at that than at 15:00.

Any other business?

ok

Ok

Oh, two things for this SIG - it doesn't have a name, currently, nor any terms of reference beyond "We should look at Jingle properly and see about making it work better with WebRTC".

Jingle: The Next Iteration?

Name, rose, sweet, etc.

"Future Jingle SIG"

SOunds good.

Anything else?

or short Fingle

Future Understanding of Signalling (FUS)

"Life After Google"

I suggest that the SIG can choose a suitable name as its first item and we can avoid doing it here :)

i'd prefer FUSS ;-)

But, for the record, blue.

Right, I think we're done.

Thanks all.

Future Understanding of Signaling Specifications

there

Thanks Kev

(I'm trying to figure out a backronym for FUJ, now)

yay

Future Undermining of Jingle

Fear, Uncertainty and Jingle

heh

nice

Peter Waher: the color XEP will be published imminently

thanks :)

done

Lance: aw, you missed all the fun! ;-)

stpeter: could you add the key for me to keep it updated as work proceed

jabberjocke: I would prefer for Peter to update his own specifications -- if he would like to make you a co-author on all of the specs, then I'd be happy with having you do the check-ins, but if not then it would be best for Peter to learn about git so that he can check in his own changes

it feels strange to me for someone who is not an author to be checking in code/text for someone else

ok we'd better do some education :)

hehe

it's good to know about source control anyway

source control is your friend :-)

would gladly help out in some of that tedious work you have, which you mentioned last council

wow, I just received my first-ever spam message in Latvian

jabberjocke: yes, I need to think about how we can structure the work, and I really appreciate the fact that you've volunteered!

jabberjocke: I will report about that at next week's meeting

or before, on the standards@ list

stpeter: i always miss the fun meetings :/

lance: we can have a fun meeting where we decide how to remote-control a camera over jingle (-:

adhoc commands. done

doh, i hadn't considered that one

that would fit nicely with the existing remote controlling clients xeps

stpeter throw an email a bit busy next week or i just check the loggs

jabberjocke: ok!

right, but it's part of and associated with the jingle session. heh, we now have an sig where we can discuss that

fippo: PS: Just as a side comment: Controlling web cameras is one of the use cases of the IoT-control XEP, and is more documented on the soon-to-be-published-but-available-on-the-wiiki protoXEP IoT Interoperability.

Peter Waher: cool :-)

yai!

Folks, The XMPP Council has formed a new SIG as per XEP-0002. The terms of reference are to re-examine Jingle particularly in the light of technology shifts such as WebRTC, newer proprietary products, and so on, and see what extensions and potential changes we might make to Jingle to make it an attractive platform to build upon. The SIG will create a coherent technical direction as a written document (probably a XEP), and may submit one or more concrete extensions as XEPs for the Standards SIG to consider. SIGs have a chair role and some leaders - roughly equivalent to Kevin Smith and the XMPP Council's roles respectively - this leadership is chosen, and serves, at the Council's discretion and currently comprises of: Dave Cridland (Chair) Philipp Hancke Ralph Meijer Lance Stout The leadership is primarily there to act as a final judge of the technical quality of the directions the SIG gives, and ensure that suggestions and comments do not slip below the radar. Since it is subject to change, if you'd be able to pitch in, please let either me or the XMPP Council know.

That's what I have written as a draft to send to the jingle@ list. Any comments or objections?

'+1

+1

WFM

Kev, ?

if emil ivov was awake i would immediately recruit him

Lance: thanks for the Python feedback, I'm in the midst of a more general refactor at the moment, too ;-)

Dave Cridland: I would note that the desired output is a plan to ensure we can maintain interoperability across device types using XMPP.

Although not necessarily with those words.

That is: My big concern with things like SoX, SDPoJ and legacy Jingle is that we start creating interop zones where phones can interop with SIP but not with Jingle, browsers can only interop with each other, etc.

I would like us to have A Plan, rather than three competing plans.

kev: sox is more for cusax scenarios i think

wow, I think I'll need to declare bankruptcy on this topic sooner than I thought

bankruptcy?

that I can't follow this topic with the attention it needs (-:

Regarding camera control, using IoT-Sensor-data & IoT-control, check the XMPP.IoT.Media.Camera interface in the Interoperability protoXEP: http://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/joachimlindborg/XMPP-IoT/blob/master/xep-0000-IoT-Interoperability.html

m&m: you guys might simply merge my pull request on dna and be done with that ;-)

m&m: I really would like to have the cycles this deserves.

fippo: IMHO, SoX is useful when you have a mixed infrastructure of SIP-only endpoints and XMPP-only endpoints (and perhaps even CUSAX endpoints), and you don't want a stateful gateway / translator in the middle

The XMPP Council has formed a new Special Interest Group ("SIG") as per XEP-0002, called the "Future Jingle SIG". The terms of reference are to re-examine Jingle particularly in the light of technology shifts such as WebRTC, newer proprietary products, and so on, and see what extensions and potential changes we might make to Jingle to make it an attractive platform to build upon, which will maximize interoperability across a wide range of devices and environments. The SIG will create a coherent technical direction as a written document (probably a XEP), and may submit one or more concrete extensions as XEPs for the Standards SIG to consider.

New paras to address Kev's comment. And actually say what a SIG is.

Dave Cridland: That's great by me, thanks.

personally, I would like to get the SoX proposal published as a XEP, and encourage other proposals as well so that we can have documentation of the various approaches (just as we did years ago for pubsub)

but I've always been in favor of publishing and not leaving things in the inbox

back to Python... :-)

fippo: you have a link to the pull request

oh and hmph, I need to get my Prosody server running again...

jabberjocke: the dna (domain name assertions) one?

stpeter: I'm not opposed to publishing SoX in the same way we did DMUCs with a "This is published as a discussion point to inform the SIG formed for investigation of the future of Jingle. It is not intended to be implemented until/unless the SIG has formed its conclusions" or something.

kev: that reminds me that last friday i had to implement dmuc2 ;-)

fippo: Heh.

maybe a new status "for discussion purposes"?

fippo: they're all for discussion purposes, IMHO

fippo: missed you where aiming to m&m

"Experimental, but this time we really mean it"?

btw: we also need to get rid of this scary red line for xeps that have been deferred because of inactivity...

Having XEPs which are broken in Experimental does both encourage people to get them through to Draft, and also avoids the kind of Proposed-Means-Standard thing that's happened at the IETF.

I alos like that fact

Dave Cridland: It's already happened. Draft means Final.

Experimental means Draft, and Deferred means Experimental :)

(Well, kinda)

we are definitely aiming Draft for IoT Xeps

(at least)

IoT architecture & installations have life spans of +10 years, and need to be stable