XSF logo XMPP Council - 2013-08-28


  1. m&m has joined
  2. m&m has left
  3. m&m has joined
  4. m&m has left
  5. Tobias has left
  6. Lance has left
  7. Kev has left
  8. Tobias has joined
  9. Kev has left
  10. Tobias has left
  11. Tobias has joined
  12. Tobias has left
  13. Tobias has joined
  14. Tobias has left
  15. Tobias has joined
  16. Tobias has left
  17. Tobias has joined
  18. MattJ has joined
  19. Tobias meeting today?
  20. Kev Yes.
  21. Tobias k
  22. Kev Agenda is all of the stuck-at-proposed XEPs, plus your patch.
  23. Tobias ahh
  24. Kev I fear I'll have reviewed none of it and have to vote on list.
  25. Kev Especially the 301 changes. Has anyone other than me reviewed that properly?
  26. Tobias haven't yet..but can do so till next week
  27. Tobias if that's still worth anything
  28. Kev Got a fortnight to vote after today.
  29. Tobias ok..will do that then
  30. MattJ Likewise
  31. m&m has joined
  32. m&m has left
  33. m&m has joined
  34. bear has left
  35. Tobias has left
  36. Tobias has joined
  37. Peter Waher has joined
  38. fippo has joined
  39. m&m so are we on like Donkey Kong?
  40. Tobias in 9 minutes i think
  41. maineboy has joined
  42. m&m right
  43. ralphm m&m: quoting Ice Cube, huh?
  44. MattJ I pretend it's still 15:00
  45. maineboy howdy
  46. ralphm MattJ: me too
  47. MattJ Howdy maineboy
  48. maineboy is really stpeter but this is a backup backup account ;-)
  49. MattJ Guessed :)
  50. m&m I am a child of the 80's
  51. ralphm :-D
  52. Tobias maineboy, still haven't fixed your prosody instance?
  53. maineboy Tobias: not yet
  54. MattJ Yes, very strange stuff going on there...
  55. maineboy Tobias: I need to make that a priority, but I have so many priorities...
  56. maineboy MattJ: I might need to reinstall the OS ;-)
  57. Tobias heh
  58. maineboy I suppose I could at least have joined the room using my @cisco.com account to be semi-official
  59. stpeter has joined
  60. ralphm maineboy: are you the real stpeter?
  61. stpeter ralphm: yes, just a different account
  62. ralphm stpeter: and how can we tell?
  63. stpeter right, that's the question
  64. stpeter I can update a page at https://stpeter.im for you or send a PGP-signed message to council@xmpp.org if you'd like :-)
  65. ralphm stpeter: what's the single must-visit attraction while in Brussels?
  66. stpeter of course, someone else could have gotten control over stpeter's machine, learned his 40+ character PGP password, and is now sending messages as him :-)
  67. Kev Blip.
  68. stpeter but I did send a PGP-signed message to council@ for you ;-)
  69. stpeter of course
  70. ralphm pfft
  71. stpeter how do we really know who people are?
  72. ralphm let's start
  73. m&m time
  74. ralphm I'm here
  75. Kev 1) Roll call.
  76. stpeter identity is hard :-)
  77. Kev ralphm: hoorah for pipelining? :)
  78. m&m actually present for once
  79. MattJ Here
  80. Tobias here
  81. Kev I'm here!
  82. Kev 2) Tobias did http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0082/diff/1.0/vs/1.1 ages ago. OK if we raise that one now?
  83. Kev Where 'now' means 'on list in the next fortnight', I imagine.
  84. Kev Actually, it's so short, we can just read it now.
  85. MattJ +1
  86. Kev +1
  87. MattJ I just read it
  88. Tobias +1
  89. stpeter ah, that's better, yes
  90. ralphm +1
  91. m&m nrm
  92. ralphm actually, many of my contacts appear to live in california, as all their mail comes in PDT
  93. stpeter PDT is the new GMT
  94. m&m this is better .. but I do wonder if "SHOULD covert" would be better than "are advised to convert"
  95. m&m but, this is a definite improvement, so I'm +1
  96. ralphm m&m: that would make it normative
  97. m&m right
  98. ralphm m&m: a bit too strong, I think
  99. m&m given it's a security concern, I don't think it's too strong
  100. Kev I don't think SHOULD is strictly needed, although I don't have terribly strong feelings on the matter.
  101. MattJ Hmm
  102. Kev Given a full house of +1, let's publish this, and it can be further wordsmithed in 1.2 :)
  103. m&m exactly
  104. MattJ A client might want to change to a random timezone for security purposes
  105. m&m heh
  106. Kev So, on the the XEPs-stuck-at-proposed:
  107. ralphm MattJ: Like +0:19
  108. stpeter heh
  109. Kev 3) XEP-0301: In-Band Real Time Text Move to Draft?
  110. MattJ Why this one first? :P
  111. Kev I need to go through this and check the responses to all my comments from last time.
  112. MattJ I'll vote on-list
  113. m&m same as MattJ
  114. Tobias will vote on list within a week
  115. ralphm AOL
  116. m&m wants to use the IST timezone
  117. Kev I would recommend that anyone who hasn't yet done a full review of this version schedules it early in the cycle, because I've spent man-weeks on it at this point, it's not fast.
  118. Kev 4) XEP-0297: Stanza Forwarding Draft?
  119. m&m right
  120. stpeter likes the reverse-numerical order
  121. m&m I had an outstanding comment that was not addressed … but I cannot remember where that is now
  122. Lance has joined
  123. Kev I have doubts about the authors for this one, but it seems ok despite that disadvantage.
  124. MattJ Story with 297... last call happened, feedback was received, and I incorporated it into a new version (0.5)
  125. MattJ Then Dave gave some more feedback on that version: http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2013-June/027623.html
  126. Kev MattJ: OK, so that's punting this and bringing 0.5 later, OK.
  127. m&m maybe that's my problem … I didn't read 0.5 yet (-:
  128. Tobias Kev, does it have implementations?
  129. Kev Tobias: anyone doing MAM.
  130. Tobias ah..ok
  131. MattJ I don't know whether it should still head to draft, or wait for me to address these concerns (which I haven't fully reviewed)
  132. Kev MattJ: At least 0.5 should be published first :)
  133. Kev So we can Deal With This Later.
  134. MattJ It is
  135. Kev Hmm.
  136. ralphm so the author doesn't think it is ready. Cool
  137. Kev I see 0.4 on xmpp.org
  138. MattJ It isn't!
  139. stpeter BTW, the issue of forwarding (and max-forwards / loop prevention) came up in the STOX WG at the IETF, since SIP has loop-prevention methods in place but XMPP doesn't
  140. stpeter hmm, yeah, was the XEP Editor remiss about http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0297.html ?
  141. MattJ stpeter, you should have stayed anonymous :)
  142. Kanchil stpeter: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0297.html: XEP-0297: Stanza Forwarding
  143. MattJ stpeter, http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2013-June/027620.html
  144. Kev Mooooving on :)
  145. stpeter MattJ: OK!
  146. Kev 5) XEP-0288: Bidirectional Server-to-Server Connections
  147. Kev Draft?
  148. ralphm Kev: so is it really Rejected now?
  149. Kev I need to -onlist.
  150. Kev ralphm: Presumably so :)
  151. MattJ I think I'm +1, but it's been a while so I'll say on list
  152. m&m I will vote on list for −0288
  153. ralphm Kev: I'd like that, we don't have many of those
  154. Tobias vote on list for that too
  155. ralphm I have to review all the s2s stuff still
  156. Kev I keep wanting to do a clean-room implementation of 220 and 288, but I keep failing to find time. Which is a shame.
  157. Kev 6) XEP-0220: Server Dialback On list.
  158. fippo i still have a patch for 0288 to address the feedback from zash and need to pester my co-author about the other issue raised by michal vaner. but those don't touch the substance
  159. Kev Or rather.
  160. Kev 6) XEP-0220: Server Dialback
  161. ralphm Kev: same. I have a dial back implementation in Wokkel, but it sucks
  162. Kev I need to vote on-list.
  163. m&m Kev: same
  164. MattJ Is 220 still ready for draft?
  165. MattJ I still see lots of discussion going on
  166. stpeter IMHO 220 is ready for Final :P
  167. MattJ Heh
  168. Kev I did review 220 the other week, but I'll do it again.
  169. stpeter I still think it should've been Draft when we copied it over from a Proposed Standard RFC, but hey
  170. Kev stpeter: Well, I found an issue during last review :p
  171. fippo kev: your schema bug was fixed
  172. Kev fippo: Yep, ta :)
  173. stpeter Kev: there are issues with RFC 6120, too ;-)
  174. Kev Don't tell anyone.
  175. MattJ stpeter, when you put it that way, you're right.... what are we even discussing?
  176. Kev 7) XEP-0152: Reachability Addresses
  177. Kev I will also on-list this one.
  178. stpeter well, I'd like to make sure it's in good shape, but perfection is not necessary for Draft status
  179. m&m ditto
  180. MattJ Kev, incomplete last call I think? Only Lance replied
  181. stpeter and dialback has certainly been deployed for almost 13 years now ;-)
  182. Kev MattJ: Ah, still?
  183. MattJ afaict
  184. MattJ m&m, did I imagine that you were using this for something?
  185. m&m I was using reachability?
  186. Kev I thought we had a protoxep to vote on, but I can't find it. Maybe I'm thinking of dynamic forms. M&M: Did you send your objections on-list for that one?
  187. MattJ m&m, if not than I imagined it :)
  188. m&m I have not yet, but I am doing it now
  189. Kev OK, thanks.
  190. stpeter reachability addresses are relevant to any CUSAX client, but I haven't yet convinced developers of CUSAX clients at Cisco to add the feature
  191. m&m I can see uses for reachability, but I don't have anything concrete
  192. m&m and what maineboy said
  193. Kev I think that takes us to 9) Next meeting.
  194. MattJ +1
  195. Kev SBTSBC? We seem to just about cope with 20 minute meetings.
  196. ralphm stpeter: jbox
  197. stpeter see for instance http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ivov-xmpp-cusax-07#section-3.3
  198. Kanchil stpeter: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ivov-xmpp-cusax-07#section-3.3: draft-ivov-xmpp-cusax-07 - CUSAX: Combined Use of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)
  199. m&m Kev: +1 on 9)
  200. stpeter ralphm: hehe, I was just talking about jbox the other day with temas ;-)
  201. Kev stpeter: I wonder if you could get any CUSAX people to express an opinion, then?
  202. Tobias Kev, wfm
  203. Kev and item 10) Any other business?
  204. ralphm stpeter: how many implementations are there?
  205. stpeter Kev: I've also poked the Jitsi folks about it, but will do so again
  206. Kev Other than kicking us all out and replacing us with newer, younger versions.
  207. Peter Waher I have one question
  208. Kev Although I think that's probably not really Council business as much as Alex's.
  209. Kev Peter Waher: shoot.
  210. ralphm Kev: us roolz
  211. Peter Waher I received a mail from UPnP members forum, stating a cooperation between UPnP+cloud and XMPP was underfoot
  212. Peter Waher any information you can share?
  213. fippo stpeter: i might implement it if your @cisco account announces it ;-)
  214. Peter Waher I would be interested to participate in any such work
  215. Kev Peter Waher: stpeter's your man, I think.
  216. ralphm Peter Waher: that's nice
  217. fippo kev: no, he's his (maine)boy
  218. Peter Waher it relates to the IoT-effort we're working on
  219. Kev fippo: Ho ho ho.
  220. Kev stpeter: Weren't you involved in this?
  221. Peter Waher any information you could share would be appreciated
  222. stpeter Peter Waher: as far as I know that is not public information yet, so I haven't said anything
  223. Kev OK.
  224. Kev I guess that means we're done, then?
  225. stpeter Peter Waher: is there something published on their website about it?
  226. Peter Waher for UPnP members
  227. stpeter http://upnp.org/news/press_releases/ hasn't been updated yet
  228. Kanchil stpeter: http://upnp.org/news/press_releases/: UPnP Forum
  229. stpeter sure, but we're not UPnP members here
  230. stpeter as soon as they go public with it, I'd be happy to talk
  231. Kev Right, I'll take that as done for the meeting.
  232. Kev Thanks all!
  233. MattJ Thanks Kev :)
  234. Kev bangeth the gavel
  235. Tobias thnaks Kev
  236. Tobias thanks Kev
  237. Peter Waher ok
  238. Peter Waher I'll be waiting for any comments on the dynamic forms also
  239. Peter Waher waiting to respond
  240. Kev Peter Waher: Thanks.
  241. stpeter Council calendar updated with meetings for September
  242. stpeter http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0297.html updated too
  243. Kanchil stpeter: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0297.html: XEP-0297: Stanza Forwarding
  244. Kev stpeter: Ta.
  245. m&m awaits minutes, so he can add a smorgasbord of TODOs
  246. m&m (-:
  247. Tobias stpeter, do all initials in the change history need to be listed in the authors section?
  248. m&m /-:
  249. stpeter Tobias: are you asking as a general policy matter and do you have an example?
  250. Tobias stpeter, xep-0082 http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0082/diff/1.0/vs/1.1 i barely added what other people suggested ;)
  251. stpeter ah
  252. stpeter hmm yes
  253. Tobias ok
  254. stpeter BTW I don't know why I'm listed as an author on XEP-0297 either ;-)
  255. Tobias same goes for quite a lot papers in the scientific community it seems :/
  256. stpeter Tobias: that's a good question — especially for XEPs that are in maintenance mode
  257. stpeter I've certainly fixed things in older XEPs and didn't add myself as a co-author, although usually I'm already an author on all that stuff ;-)
  258. Tobias right
  259. stpeter and sometimes we take over specifications from people who have disappeared, and the new maintainer is added as a co-author if they make some significant changes
  260. stpeter we might want to be clearer about our policies in such cases
  261. stpeter and also figure out how to do more "collective authorship" (e.g., Council members or XSF members or other help out with fixing bugs like the one in XEP-0082)
  262. maineboy has joined
  263. maineboy :P
  264. Kev maineboy: Are your other accounts still having issues on the server?
  265. maineboy although Adium (which I'm using here) always shows me as "Peter Saint-Andre"
  266. maineboy Kev: AFAICT yes
  267. Kev Curious. As we had an 'automatic restart' earlier.
  268. maineboy but that's off-topic for this chatroom
  269. MattJ maineboy, you provided the schema for 297 :)
  270. maineboy BTW, I'll note that draft-ietf-precis-framework is now in Working Group Last Call, which means that draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis (the addressing / i18n stuff) will go to WGLC before too long, too
  271. ralphm maineboy: how did those tests against our stringpreps go?
  272. maineboy MattJ: ah, schemas are purely a mechanical exercise IMHO, just add me to the acknowledgements
  273. Kev maineboy: It is, but you're not my friend on that account :)
  274. Peter Waher has left
  275. maineboy ralphm: I have some Python code to help me check codepoint handling, but I haven't applied them directly to the XMPP cases yet
  276. ralphm oh
  277. maineboy so I need to dig into the Python again and finish that up
  278. maineboy also need to do some planning for the XMPP Summit
  279. ralphm ight
  280. ralphm right
  281. Lance has left
  282. MattJ ralphm, how's FOSDEM looking?
  283. Lance has joined
  284. maineboy sigh, I have a lot of Internet-Drafts to finish up by the end of the year … http://www.arkko.com/tools/allstats/petersaint-andre.html
  285. Kanchil maineboy: http://www.arkko.com/tools/allstats/petersaint-andre.html: Peter Saint-Andre Data (all documents)
  286. maineboy PRECIS, STOX, 6122bis, 2141bis, 3406bis … yikes
  287. maineboy after that I think I'll take a break from publishing RFCs ;-)
  288. fippo don't forget the DNA drafts
  289. maineboy might not finish those this year
  290. ralphm MattJ: I just sent out the e-mail. Thanks for the reminder
  291. maineboy Matt and I are working to update the POSH spec, but with the goal of making it easy to implement
  292. maineboy running code and all that
  293. fippo even right... reminds me that I need to fix a couple of bugs in mine (-:
  294. maineboy heh
  295. ralphm bah, code just breaks
  296. maineboy we plan to submit a new version of the POSH spec by the end of next week
  297. maineboy and DNA along with it
  298. fippo remember that there is still an issue in DNA over at github :-)
  299. maineboy ah, will check that
  300. fippo oh, pull request even
  301. Neustradamus has left
  302. Neustradamus has joined
  303. fippo has left
  304. maineboy has left
  305. maineboy has joined
  306. maineboy has left
  307. Lance has left
  308. Lance has joined
  309. Lance has left
  310. Lance has joined
  311. maineboy has joined
  312. jabberjocke has joined
  313. stpeter has joined
  314. stpeter has left
  315. maineboy has left
  316. Lance has left
  317. Lance has joined
  318. m&m has left
  319. Lance has left
  320. Lance has joined
  321. maineboy has joined