Wednesday, December 11, 2013
council@muc.xmpp.org
December
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
            1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
         
XMPP Council Room | https://xmpp.org/about/xmpp-standards-foundation#council | Room logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/ | https://trello.com/b/ww7zWMlI/xmpp-council-agenda

[00:04:20] *** jabberjocke has joined the room
[00:04:21] *** jabberjocke shows as "online"
[00:07:21] *** Zash shows as "away"
[00:13:07] *** tato has left the room
[00:16:29] *** Zash shows as "online"
[00:56:14] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[00:56:43] *** stpeter has left the room
[01:05:42] *** stpeter has joined the room
[01:15:34] *** stpeter has left the room
[01:45:33] *** tato has joined the room
[02:10:28] *** jabberjocke has left the room
[02:42:38] *** stpeter has joined the room
[02:53:33] *** stpeter has left the room
[03:07:34] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[03:07:35] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[03:11:30] *** Tobias has left the room
[03:49:56] *** tato has left the room
[03:50:44] *** Lance shows as "away"
[03:55:43] *** Lance shows as "online"
[06:00:53] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[06:11:19] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[06:37:47] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[06:47:55] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[07:23:01] *** Kev has joined the room
[07:23:02] *** Kev shows as "online"
[07:28:17] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[07:39:28] *** Kev shows as "away"
[07:39:59] *** Kev shows as "online"
[07:41:22] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[07:45:11] *** Kev has left the room
[07:51:26] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[08:46:26] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[08:51:02] *** bear has left the room
[08:51:04] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[09:07:18] *** Kev has joined the room
[09:07:19] *** Kev shows as "online"
[09:07:49] *** Kev has left the room
[09:09:20] *** Kev has joined the room
[09:09:21] *** Kev shows as "online"
[09:16:32] *** Zash has joined the room
[09:16:33] *** Zash shows as "online"
[09:30:51] *** Kev shows as "away"
[09:36:04] *** Kev shows as "online"
[09:38:32] *** Lance has joined the room
[09:38:32] *** Lance shows as "online"
[09:43:34] *** Tobias has left the room
[09:48:47] *** Kev has left the room
[10:21:44] *** Tobias has joined the room
[10:21:46] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[10:40:54] *** Lance has joined the room
[10:52:24] *** Zash shows as "away"
[11:03:54] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[11:11:53] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[11:18:49] *** Zash shows as "online"
[11:31:39] *** Tobias has left the room
[11:31:58] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[11:37:11] *** Tobias has joined the room
[11:37:12] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[11:38:30] *** Lance has joined the room
[11:38:31] *** Lance shows as "online"
[11:42:42] *** Lance shows as "away"
[11:53:14] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[11:54:12] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[12:11:24] *** ralphm shows as "away" and his status message is "Away as a result of being idle"
[12:12:53] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[12:13:16] *** ralphm shows as "online"
[12:29:45] *** jabberjocke has joined the room
[12:29:46] *** jabberjocke shows as "online"
[12:37:37] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[12:59:21] *** ralphm shows as "xa" and his status message is "Back in some minutes."
[13:36:21] *** stpeter has joined the room
[13:52:20] *** Zash has left the room
[14:03:07] *** stpeter has left the room
[14:03:20] *** Peter Waher has joined the room
[14:32:29] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[14:53:02] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[14:58:40] *** stpeter has joined the room
[15:01:52] *** jabberjocke has left the room
[15:10:39] *** Kev has joined the room
[15:10:40] *** Kev shows as "online"
[15:12:06] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[15:18:02] *** winfried has joined the room
[15:18:29] *** stpeter shows as "dnd" and his status message is "on a conference call"
[15:25:50] <Peter Waher> Anybody knows when the council meeting will start?
[15:28:46] <Peter Waher> confused about time zones and summer/winter time in different hemispheres
[15:34:13] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[15:34:25] <stpeter> Peter Waher: should be in ~30 minutes
[15:34:43] <Peter Waher> thanks
[15:36:20] *stpeter is on a conference call but should be done by then
[15:41:25] *** Tobias shows as "dnd" and his status message is "Busy"
[15:43:08] *** Dave Cridland has joined the room
[15:45:10] *** bear has joined the room
[15:45:11] *** bear shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[15:46:36] <Kev> Trying to review protoXEPs while exhausted is almost more fun than I can describe :)
[15:47:36] <Tobias> why did we get rid of pipelining for BOSH?
[15:47:50] <fippo> kev: get over to paris and listen to people talking about RCS and IMS!
[15:47:52] <Kev> AIUI, because no-one did it and it's not legal.
[15:48:02] <Kev> fippo: Revision Control System? :)
[15:48:11] <fippo> rich communication suite
[15:48:35] <Kev> I like mine better.
[15:48:36] <Tobias> Kev, pidgin did it at one point, if darkrain didn't remove it....will ask him about that :)
[15:50:17] *** Peter Waher shows as "away" and his status message is "Auto Status (idle)"
[15:51:06] *** bear shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[15:51:08] *** bear shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[15:51:11] <Kev> I think I need to review colibri some time that's not now.
[15:53:47] <Tobias> quite a big agenda this tiem
[15:53:49] <Tobias> quite a big agenda this time
[15:54:04] *** winfried shows as "away" and his status message is "sssssttttt! my computer fell asleep"
[15:54:05] *** winfried shows as "online" and his status message is "It is already a mess here, so chat with me!"
[15:55:26] *** Lance shows as "online"
[15:55:29] <Tobias> Kev, will there be a LMC update?
[15:55:39] <Dave Cridland> Kev, Pipelining POST, you mean? That's a SHOULD NOT in the spec, and we had reasons aplenty - I don't think we were breaking the spec with that.
[16:00:36] <winfried> @Tobias: BOSH makes POST requests and you may not pipeline POST
[16:01:00] *** Peter Waher shows as "online"
[16:01:11] <Tobias> winfried, ah..okay
[16:08:23] <Kev> Dave Cridland: Ignoring a SHOULD NOT /is/ breaking the spec, IMHO.
[16:09:09] <Tobias> wasn't always a should not, at least not in the BOSH spec...but don't know for sure...i implemented it eons ago
[16:09:53] <Kev> No, we used to say in bosh that you should.
[16:10:50] <stpeter> 'tis time?
[16:10:53] <Tobias> hammer time
[16:10:58] <Kev> 'tis time.
[16:11:03] <Kev> 1) Roll call.
[16:11:04] <Dave Cridland> Kev, Well, *ignoring* is not the same as acknowledging but doing it anyway. The rule is there for good reason - start pipelining POSTs at something that's not expecting it and all manner of things can go boom. But between consenting adults it's fine.
[16:11:06] <Lance> here
[16:11:09] <Tobias> hereo
[16:11:32] <Kev> fippo was in doubt.
[16:11:38] <Kev> Matt sends apologies.
[16:11:44] <Kev> fippo: You here?
[16:12:03] <stpeter> fippo is in Paris for WebRTC stuff right now, no?
[16:12:16] <Kev> stpeter: Yes, he didn't know if he'd be Councilling.
[16:12:19] <Kev> When I spoke to him earlier.
[16:12:24] <Kev> But he doesn't seem to be here.
[16:12:26] <Kev> 2) EventLogging
http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/eventlogging.html
[16:12:46] <Kev> There's been some amount of confusion over there. I'm not opposing objecting.
[16:12:53] <Kev> Uhm.
[16:12:59] <Kev> Not opposing *publishing*.
[16:13:09] <Lance> +1 for going experimental
[16:13:18] <Tobias> what's the expected locale if the XEP says one shouldn't localize?
[16:13:28] <Tobias> regardless of that i'm +1 for experimental
[16:13:35] <Kev> Tobias: Then I suggest asking on list :)
[16:13:40] <Kev> 3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0124/diff/1.11rc1/vs/1.11rc2
http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0124/diff/1.10/vs/1.11rc2
With changes since last meeting.
[16:13:51] <fippo> kev: here, but not physically. will vote on list :-/
[16:13:56] <Kev> I'm +1 on this.
[16:13:58] <Kev> fippo: Thanks.
[16:14:03] <Lance> +1 on the changes
[16:14:07] <Tobias> +1 on XEP-0124
[16:14:37] <Kev> 4) http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0156/diff/1.1rc1/vs/1.1rc2
Changes since last meeting.
[16:14:43] <Kev> I'm +1 here too.
[16:14:50] <Lance> We do still need a legend/explanation from m&m for the chart though in 124
[16:14:53] <Lance> +1 on 156
[16:14:54] <stpeter> are some patches still missing / issues not addressed for BOSH specs? Winfried's message suggested so
[16:15:02] <Peter Waher> Tobias: Sorry, all very quick... What do you mean with "what's the expected locale if the XEP says one shouldn't localize"?
[16:15:12] *stpeter is still on his conference call
[16:15:40] <Tobias> wonder why XEP-0156 defaults to unsecure HTTP and unsecure DNS for retrieval of connection methods
[16:16:23] <Tobias> Peter Waher, it says you shouldn't localized messages, does that mean that all are supposed to be in english? or in the language of the original software but never translated? or what exactly?
[16:16:49] <Kev> Tobias / Peter Waher: If this isn't blocking publication, I suggest we take it to the list to move things along.
[16:16:50] <Tobias> wouldn't it be sensible to expect lookup of those via HTTPS/DNSSEC if possible?
[16:17:02] <Peter Waher> you can localize messages. What you shouldn't do is localize event IDs, for instance
[16:17:25] <Peter Waher> "event IDs should never be localized"
[16:17:30] <Peter Waher> "tag names should never be localized"
[16:17:34] <Tobias> +1 on 156, will disuss it with lance later, if he wants
[16:17:42] <Peter Waher> everything else can be localized
[16:17:43] <Kev> Thanks.
[16:17:45] <stpeter> Tobias: yes, it would, but the security considerations say:

Entities that use these connection methods need to ensure that they conform to the security considerations of each method (e.g., by preferring to use 'https' or 'wss' URLs that are protected using Transport Layer Security).

[16:17:48] <Lance> Tobias: k
[16:17:51] <Kev> 5) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/jingle-grouping.html
[16:17:55] <Tobias> +1
[16:17:58] <Lance> +1
[16:18:17] <Kev> I'm -1 on this.
[16:18:24] <Tobias> Kev, why?
[16:18:27] <Kev> But only because we cannot take RFC content and include it in XEPs.
[16:18:45] <Kev> See the recent discussion on w3c examples in XEPs.
[16:18:58] <fippo> kev: thanks, I was in doubt about that
[16:19:10] <stpeter> you mean "a=group:LS voice webcam"?
[16:19:19] <Kev> fippo: XEP submission is copyright assignment. You can't copyright assign an RFC to the XSF, so ...
[16:19:34] <Kev> stpeter: Yes, so it's trivial to fix.
[16:19:43] <Kev> But it says at the bottom that it's doing it, so we should fix it.
[16:19:55] <fippo> kev: will do.
[16:20:07] <Kev> fippo: Ta. You can tell what I'm going to say about a later submission too :)
[16:20:07] <Kev> 6) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/peptzo.html
[16:20:11] <Kev> This looked fine to me.
[16:20:34] <Lance> There was discussion on list that this should be a change to XEP-0080 GeoLoc instead
[16:20:48] <Tobias> +1 on peptzo
[16:20:53] *** m&m has joined the room
[16:20:53] <stpeter> I don't see ""a=group:LS voice webcam" in RFC 5888
[16:21:10] <Lance> Does council think updating 80 is a better approach?
[16:21:11] <Kev> Yeah. I didn't really think that was conclusive, but I'm happy for you to retract this instead if you like :)
[16:21:32] <Kev> Lance: I've not formed an opinion yet.
[16:21:54] <Kev> Shall we put this onto the next meeting agenda?
[16:22:06] <Lance> Yeah, so a -1 from me today
[16:22:08] <fippo> stpeter: I think i adapted to 0167 already... but need to check again
[16:22:11] <Kev> OK.
[16:22:27] <Kev> 7) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/colibri.html
[16:22:46] <Kev> I have to vote on this one on-list, I don't have the cycles to review it today.
[16:22:46] <Tobias> will vote on list for this one
[16:22:58] <Kev> s/don't/didn't/
[16:23:25] <Lance> i'm +1 for exerimental
[16:23:38] <Kev> Ta.
[16:23:39] <Kev> 8) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/jingle-sources.html
[16:23:50] <Kev> I'm -1 just for the RFC examples reason, again.
[16:23:58] <Tobias> here i was surprised by the urnietf:rfc:5576
[16:24:06] <Tobias> here i was surprised by the urn:ietf:rfc:5576
[16:24:22] <Tobias> does that have to be registered somwhere?
[16:24:41] <stpeter> Tobias: we already do urn:ietf:rfc:3264
[16:24:56] <Tobias> stpeter, ahh..ok. didn't know about that
[16:25:05] <Lance> +1 once the rfc legal stuff is resolved
[16:25:15] <Tobias> same as lance...+1 then
[16:25:28] <stpeter> Tobias: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2648
[16:25:30] <Kev> 9) Board requests for liaisons.
[16:25:58] <fippo> tobias: rfc 2648 defines that
[16:26:00] <stpeter> yes
[16:26:13] <Kev> bear / stpeter: This one's for one of you.
[16:26:25] <stpeter> I have been in communication with the UPnP Forum about a liaison relationship
[16:26:55] <stpeter> their spec-in-progress references the core XMPP stuff as well as various pubsub-related specifications
[16:27:05] <stpeter> they *might* also hope for some input regarding Jingle
[16:27:11] <stpeter> that's less clear right now
[16:27:35] <stpeter> I can work with the Council regarding a call for volunteers
[16:28:03] <Kev> stpeter: How many people in this liason? One or more?
[16:28:13] <stpeter> can be more than one
[16:28:28] <Kev> And does this happen in public or private?
[16:28:35] <stpeter> in this case, I might say "should be more than one"
[16:29:41] <stpeter> this work happens within the UPnP Forum, and their work is not public -- they have a working group made up up UPnP members and invited "observers" (which would include the people we name)
[16:30:02] <stpeter> I think it would be best for now if we name only XSF members, too
[16:30:12] <stpeter> not just general people we find on the street :-)
[16:30:19] <Tobias> heh
[16:30:38] <stpeter> i.e., we are treating this liaison group as a "Work Team" per http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xsf-bylaws/
[16:31:31] <stpeter> I think that I can send a PDF of the proposed liaison agreement to the membership
[16:31:32] <Kev> I'd be inclined to say that it'd be sensible to try to have someone from Council, and someone not.
[16:31:33] <stpeter> I will check on that
[16:31:41] <Kev> But let's ask for volunteers and see what happens.
[16:31:42] <stpeter> Kev: sure
[16:31:50] <Kev> So, date of next?
[16:32:06] <Peter Waher> and dynamic forms?
[16:32:09] <stpeter> Kev: IMHO the process is, Council asks for volunteers, chooses the liaison team, and proposes it to the Board for approval
[16:32:15] <Kev> stpeter: Right.
[16:32:23] *** Dave Cridland shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[16:32:52] <stpeter> (keeping in mind that we're going to have liaison relationships with UPnP Forum, ISO, and IEC by the looks of it, so we can't burden the same people with all the work IMHO)
[16:32:58] <Kev> Peter Waher: Has been covered in previous meetings, no objections.
[16:33:05] <Kev> stpeter: Yes.
[16:33:09] <Kev> So, date of next?
[16:33:11] <Peter Waher> (y)
[16:33:24] <Lance> next week, usual time is good for me
[16:33:31] <Kev> I'm inclined at this point to suggest we go for the new year, but we can do next week if people like.
[16:33:36] <Kev> Yeah, ok, let's do that.
[16:33:41] <Kev> Any other business?
[16:33:44] <stpeter> WFM
[16:33:47] <Tobias> Kev, next week wfm
[16:33:48] <stpeter> no AOB here
[16:33:49] <Peter Waher> so both can have numbers and be published as experimental?
[16:33:51] <Kev> Excellent.
[16:33:58] <stpeter> Peter Waher: I think so
[16:34:05] <Peter Waher> excellent :)
[16:34:07] <Peter Waher> thanks
[16:34:10] <Kev> Peter Waher: Need the two people not present to express an opinion for logging.
[16:34:16] <stpeter> my other conf call just finished (went 30 minutes over), sorry about the divided attention
[16:34:23] <Kev> Right, we're done.
[16:34:25] <Kev> Thanks all!
[16:34:27] *Kev bangs the gavel.
[16:34:29] <Tobias> thank you
[16:34:34] <stpeter> thanks, Kev!
[16:34:35] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[16:34:37] *** Dave Cridland shows as "online"
[16:34:37] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[16:34:51] *** Peter Waher has left the room
[16:34:53] <Lance> Tobias: what was the issue you had with 156?
[16:35:08] *** Peter Waher has joined the room
[16:35:17] *** winfried shows as "xa" and his status message is "this will take some time"
[16:35:35] <stpeter> Lance: that it should be done over HTTPS or DNSSEC if possible
[16:35:44] <stpeter> I think the security considerations talk about that, but perhaps not strongly enough for his taste
[16:36:19] <Tobias> stpeter, i think they basically say that if you originally intended to do a secure connection you should also only choose secure alternative methods
[16:36:44] <Tobias> but i doesn't say, at least i haven't read it that way, that you should use secure methods to discover the alternative methods
[16:36:48] <stpeter> Tobias: that does make some sense
[16:37:27] <Tobias> i mean sure, DNSSEC isn't here....but HTTPS has some availability ^^
[16:37:29] <stpeter> "Entities that use these connection methods need to ensure that they conform to the security considerations of each method (e.g., by preferring to use 'https' or 'wss' URLs that are protected using Transport Layer Security)."
[16:37:48] <stpeter> that could be worded more strongly
[16:38:23] <Tobias> stpeter, that still only talks about the choice among the provided methods, right?
[16:38:29] <Dave Cridland> Tobias, You're talking about using https to do the XEP-0156 discovery, right?
[16:38:36] <Tobias> right
[16:38:38] <Dave Cridland> Tobias, Not merely using https for BOSH.
[16:38:43] <Tobias> requesting the json file via HTTPS
[16:38:52] <Tobias> or requesting that TXT record via DNSSEC
[16:39:03] <stpeter> Tobias: yes, agreed
[16:39:07] <Lance> ah, right. yeah, adding a sentence for that should be done
[16:39:30] <Lance> technically that should bubble up from RFC 6415 for the host-meta stuff
[16:40:00] <stpeter> Lance: right, let's check what the RFCs say for sure
[16:40:26] <Lance> stpeter: 6415 says if authentication is necessary for what's in the host-meta file, HTTPS only MUST be used
[16:40:42] <Tobias> "Applications utilizing the host-meta document where the authenticity
of the information is necessary MUST require the use of the HTTPS
protocol and MUST NOT produce a host-meta document using other means.
In addition, such applications MUST require that any redirection
leading to the retrieval of a host-meta document also utilize the
HTTPS protocol." they have this in their sec. considerations
[16:41:36] <Tobias> but it wouldn't hurt to also mention it in the XEP, and that way we can add DNSSEC to it too
[16:42:48] <Lance> Tobias +1
[16:43:24] <stpeter> Tobias: agreed, thanks for pressing the issue
[16:45:22] *** Kev shows as "away"
[16:45:30] *** Peter Waher has left the room
[16:51:56] *** m&m has left the room
[16:55:32] *** Kev shows as "online"
[17:02:07] *** MattJ has joined the room
[17:04:08] *** Zash has joined the room
[17:04:08] *** Zash shows as "online"
[17:07:37] *** Dave Cridland shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[17:11:09] *** Kev has left the room
[17:13:53] *** Dave Cridland shows as "online"
[17:18:42] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "bbiab"
[17:39:51] *** bear shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[17:40:26] *** bear shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[17:42:13] *** Dave Cridland shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[17:43:33] *** winfried has left the room
[17:52:13] *** Dave Cridland shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Not available as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[17:52:32] *** Lance has joined the room
[17:52:33] *** Lance shows as "online"
[17:55:06] *** bear shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[18:12:49] *** Dave Cridland shows as "online"
[18:20:51] *** Zash shows as "away"
[18:20:56] *** Zash shows as "online"
[18:27:36] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[18:29:15] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[18:30:11] *** bear shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[18:30:56] *** Zash shows as "away"
[18:32:38] *** bear shows as "away" and his status message is "Away"
[18:36:47] *** Dave Cridland shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[18:45:49] *** Zash shows as "online"
[18:46:47] *** Dave Cridland shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Not available as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[18:58:52] *** Tobias has left the room
[19:15:13] *** Zash shows as "away"
[19:16:59] *** Zash shows as "online"
[19:29:23] *** Tobias has joined the room
[19:29:25] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[19:31:44] *** Dave Cridland has left the room
[19:44:57] *** Zash shows as "away"
[19:46:53] *** stpeter has left the room
[19:50:05] *** Zash shows as "online"
[20:00:07] *** Zash shows as "away"
[20:06:24] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "Available"
[20:17:35] *** Dave Cridland has joined the room
[20:19:38] *** Zash shows as "online"
[20:22:34] *** Dave Cridland shows as "away" and his status message is " (Away as a result of being idle more than 5 min)"
[20:24:26] *** Lance shows as "away"
[20:31:20] *** Neustradamus has left the room
[20:32:34] *** Dave Cridland shows as "xa" and his status message is " (Not available as a result of being idle more than 15 min)"
[20:34:15] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "Available"
[20:48:32] *** Neustradamus has joined the room
[20:58:01] *** Lance has joined the room
[21:09:06] *** Neustradamus has left the room
[21:17:32] *** Dave Cridland has left the room
[21:32:11] *** stpeter has joined the room
[21:33:17] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "*tired*"
[21:33:47] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "bbiab"
[21:43:33] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[21:43:38] *** Lance has joined the room
[21:43:39] *** Lance shows as "online"
[21:48:50] *** stpeter has left the room
[22:14:15] <fippo> stpeter: "no burden the same people" means you cant be on it :-)
[22:17:15] *** Zash shows as "away" and his status message is "Lunch"
[22:17:17] *** Zash has left the room
[22:18:21] *** Zash has joined the room
[22:18:22] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:24:26] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:24:26] *** Zash shows as "online"
[22:24:38] *** Zash has left the room
[22:33:50] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[22:44:05] *** stpeter shows as "online"
[23:03:32] *** Zash shows as "away"
[23:10:49] *** Lance shows as "away"
[23:10:50] *** Lance shows as "online"
[23:14:03] *** stpeter shows as "away" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[23:33:48] *** Tobias shows as "away" and his status message is "*tired*"
[23:34:03] *** stpeter shows as "xa" and his status message is "wandered off..."
[23:47:13] *** Tobias shows as "online" and his status message is "*tired*"