-
mlundblad
is there a meeting today?
-
stpeter
as I understand it, yes
-
stpeter
and hi :)
-
mlundblad
hi :)
-
mlundblad
Olivier CrĂȘte spoke about someone formalising the psuedo-udp ft stuff from google as a "standard" jingle spec. is this in the XSF's inbox?
-
stpeter
not in the inbox yet
-
stpeter
well
-
mlundblad
I have somewhat mixed feelings about that...
-
stpeter
there is http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/jingle-httpft.html
-
mlundblad
yeah
-
mlundblad
I was under the impression that this would meerly be a jingle transport spec.
-
stpeter
ah
-
mlundblad
not sure, though...
-
stpeter
that one
-
stpeter
yeah, there's been talk about documenting that, but no action
-
mlundblad
maybe I'm slanting towards thinking that might be a good idea, compared to ice-tcp
-
mlundblad
but maybe not...
-
stpeter
the http-over-pseudo-tcp-over-udp stuff is kind of crazy, but that doesn't mean it's bad :)
-
mlundblad
I think maybe the http stuff is overkill, though
-
mlundblad
another crazy thing though, psuedo-tcp-over-udp-over-a-tcp-relayed-turn-candidate...
-
mlundblad
yikes
-
stpeter
heehee
-
ralphm
hi
-
Kev
Evening Ralph.
-
stpeter
hiya
-
stpeter
brb
-
ralphm
warming up my foods
-
stpeter
me too :)
-
Kev
Right, Hello meetingtime
-
ralphm
Hooray!
-
Kev
Matt and Remko are both online, just getting them to join.
-
stpeter
gosh I love these people who go on vacation for a month -- how is that possible?
-
Kev
Sounds nice doesn't it? :)
-
ralphm
stpeter: come live in europe
-
stpeter
I did take a two-week vacation back in 1994, that was quite relaxing :P
-
Kev
Right.
-
Kev
So.
-
Kev
Stop. Meeting time.
-
Kev
1) Roll call.
-
Kev
Fritzy, Kev, MattJ, ralphm, remko.
- ralphm goes dmm, dm, dm, dm
-
Kev
2) Agenda bashing anyone?
-
MattJ
Not here
-
remko
nope
-
Kev
Ok then.
-
Kev
3) ProtoXEP - XMPP on Mobile Devices http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/mobile.html Accept as Experimental?
-
ralphm
yes, interesting matter
-
remko
indeed
-
Kev
I'm not objecting.
-
Kev
Fritzy / Matt?
-
Kev
Commenting on list's fine if you've not read it.
-
MattJ
No objection here, I'm glad someone finally wrote it up :)
-
stpeter
yep, that looks helpful
-
stpeter
plus I love it when someone other than me writes specs :)
-
MattJ
:)
-
Kev
stpeter: Well, Matt and I have a big stack waiting for limelight :)
-
ralphm
MattJ: how's that my-client-doesn't-support-SIFT-but-I-still-want-it feature?
-
MattJ
ralphm, which was that?
-
MattJ
or you mean the intelligent presence buffering?
-
ralphm
yeah, but such that I can tell my server to do it for a particular resource. Like 'Maemo'
-
MattJ
or a given disco identity? :)
-
ralphm
sure!
-
Kev
Ok, I think Fritzy's gone AFK, so moving on.
-
Kev
4) ProtoXEP - Digital Signatures in XMPP http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dsig.html Accept as Experimental?
-
ralphm
+1, I'm curious about the TBDs
-
remko
no objection
-
Kev
Heh, you like it more than I do.
-
MattJ
Why is it necessary to encode the contents like that?
-
Kev
I'm not convinced about signed messages being illegible to non-signing clients - i.e. you could never send signed messages to a MUC.
-
MattJ
Even e2e had some normalization routines, presumably for the same reasons
-
stpeter
I wonder if anyone will sign their XMPP stanzas, given that precious few seem to sign their email messages and that technology has been around for a long time
-
Kev
stpeter: Well, in email I can still read your mails.
-
Kev
Even though I don't process and verify the signatures.
-
ralphm
MattJ: from what I've been told, normalization like in XMLSig is quite horrible
-
Kev
That's not true here.
-
remko
kev: indeed
-
remko
kev: that doesn't really sound very good
- stpeter nods
-
remko
it's probably a workaround for the whitespace etc.
-
remko
but still, there shoudl be a better one
-
MattJ
ralphm, e2e did seem to manage, minus one case in the XEP that suggested stripping whitespace in a given instance was enough normalization
-
Kev
Well, I quite like the copy-and-sign approach, where you encode, like this, what you signed so it's there for verifying clients, and other clients get it in plaintext.
-
Kev
But I'm not winning this argument with Kurt, so I'm abstaining on this non-vote.
-
stpeter
IMHO it's early days for signing
-
stpeter
heck, it's still early days for encryption!
-
remko
stpeter: true
-
Kev
So, where are we?
-
ralphm
Well, I'm ok with it being a XEP, not necessarily thinking this is the best approach.
-
Kev
Remko and Ralph are +1, Matt was ...?
-
Kev
and Fritzy's AFK :)
-
MattJ
+1 to publishing
-
Kev
That actually raises an interesting question - if a Council member is in the room, but AFK, for a meeting, does that count as present?
-
MattJ
But I 1) think it needs some discussion going forward 2) don't think it's going to see implementations like this
-
remko
i agree with matt
-
stpeter
if a tree falls in the forest...
-
ralphm
Kev: does that actually matter?
- stpeter nods to MattJ
-
Kev
ralphm: Well, stats are kept on people's voting and attendance history, so people can do sensible things with voting in Sept/Oct.
-
Kev
Whether people use them is another matter, but they're there.
-
Kev
Anyway.
-
MattJ
I could easily leave my client idle here 24/7 then :)
-
Kev
MattJ: Right.
-
Kev
5) Winding down Council. Anything we want/need to do before the end of term?
-
Kev
Peter'd like us to get some file transfer headway made.
-
MattJ
I've nothing to say that we didn't discuss on list
-
MattJ
Archiving, etc.
-
Kev
Yes, well, I'm happy to push my specs out if you are yours :)
-
ralphm
file transfer would be nice indeed
-
MattJ
FWIW I have some comments on Jingle (it's a pain to implement)
-
ralphm
MattJ: in general?
-
stpeter
Kev: well, given that I promised to review the reviews of file transfer, I have action items I can take
-
Kev
stpeter: Jolly good, nothing for me to do yet, then.
-
Kev
7) Date of next meeting.
-
Kev
Next Monday, assuming we have things to discuss?
-
ralphm
yes
-
stpeter
:)
-
MattJ
ralphm, well I'm implementing Jingle File Transfer, the main Jingle spec defines a lot of things vaguely that aren't followed up on in JFT
-
remko
+1
-
Kev
8) Any other business?
-
MattJ
The spec was clearly split into signalling/RTP at some point, the split wasn't quite right IMHO
-
stpeter
MattJ: "the spec" = 166?
-
ralphm
MattJ: ah, so the specs are unclear? Not necessarily bad?
-
MattJ
stpeter, yes
-
MattJ
ralphm, I think (hope) mostly just unclear
-
stpeter
Kev: Council members need to decide if they are going to stand for consideration again, I suppose
-
MattJ
For example...
-
MattJ
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0166.html#session-negotiation
-
MattJ
This section has no protocol description at all
-
Kev
stpeter: I'll be seeing if there are enough sensible candidates other than me, and deciding then.
-
MattJ
Yet negotiation is surely the most significant part of Jingle :)
-
stpeter
MattJ: heh
-
Kev
I do think I've been on Council a while, and people should step down after that long if there are sensible replacements.
-
stpeter
MattJ: in general, I think we've been defining Jingle via examples such as XEP-0167
-
Kev
Ok, I'm taking this as no more other more business.
-
MattJ
Kev, turning that around... isn't that up to the members to decide?
-
stpeter
MattJ: I "discovered" some things about Jingle by writing the file transfer specs
-
remko
i'm steppnig down, because of lack of time to focus appropriately
-
MattJ
stpeter, as one of the few developers that doesn't develop implementations purely by reading examples, that's awkward :)
-
Kev
MattJ: possibly.
-
Kev
Right, I'll write up some minutes, probably tomorrow.
-
Kev
Thanks all.
-
MattJ
Thanks Kev
- Kev bangs the gavel.
-
ralphm
MattJ: hehe. Maybe you can provide some examples to be added to the spec?
-
stpeter
MattJ: by examples I meant "RTP is one example of how we'd use Jingle, but file transfer is another example / use case"
-
MattJ
ralphm, I wish I could, but I literally have no idea what that part of the protocol is meant to be like
-
stpeter
MattJ: the same is true on the transport side (UDP, TCP, etc.)
-
ralphm
MattJ: I actually think this part is intentionally vague
-
MattJ
166 describes all these commands, content-add, content-replace, etc... without saying how to use them or what they mean
-
MattJ
Ok, if it's intentionally vague then it should say so
-
stpeter
it is intentionally vague, but as we have more applications we could strengthen the core spec
-
MattJ
and the file transfer XEP should explicitly say what each command means
-
MattJ
But it doesn't
-
MattJ
Meaning at the moment I am basically implementing by 1) example 2) interop with Gajim's new code
-
mlundblad
two-week vacation?
-
mlundblad
I had a short vacation this year, only four weeks :D
-
ralphm
stpeter: for most of these things, doesn't the actual profile decide the protocol bits going in these actions?
-
stpeter
ralphm: yes
-
stpeter
ralphm: although I agree with Matthew that we could be clearer in 166
-
stpeter
mlundblad: :P
-
ralphm
stpeter: I'm unsure how to then make it more clear except by writing a fictional profil
-
ralphm
e
-
stpeter
right
-
stpeter
that's how I learned :)
-
ralphm
didn't we try that?
-
stpeter
it's like writing a novel, the characters take on a life of their own :)
-
MattJ
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0234.html doesn't mention any of the Jingle commands
-
ralphm
XEP-0208, I think
-
MattJ
I take it back... it mentions transport-info
-
MattJ
and then links to an example that uses session-info
-
stpeter
ok those are all good points
-
MattJ
The box under example 1
-
stpeter
in part file transfer is much simpler than voice and video, so it has no need for many of the Jingle commands
-
stpeter
however
-
mlundblad
transport-replace
-
stpeter
I think it would be good to say that
-
mlundblad
but that is in s5b, I think
-
stpeter
Kev: do we have definitive feedback on the message threads XEP?
-
MattJ
stpeter, I agree... which is why I suggested the split in the XEPs was in the wrong place
-
stpeter
Kev: perhaps we need to chat about that and figure out what changes are needed
-
Kev
We've got feedback from Matt, does that count?
-
ralphm
sure it does
-
Kev
MattJ: You're the definitive voice of XMPP. Congratulations :)
-
MattJ
\o/
-
stpeter
heehee
-
stpeter
the other point about file transfer was that we want to get feedback from the GSoC implementers
-
MattJ
Now if only I could finish this overdue work so I can catch up with other spec reviews
-
stpeter
MattJ: yeah, understood
-
stpeter
oh and I have more XMPP WG feedback to address, too
-
stpeter
fun
-
Kev
stpeter: I'm happy to have a work through threads with you if you like, but not tonight.
-
stpeter
at least I'm adding acknowledgements so that all you helpful reviewers receive some credit
-
Kev
Ta muchly.
-
Kev
My name in lights :)
-
stpeter
Kev: sure, perhaps tomorrow or Wednesday or whatever
-
Kev
Right, AFK.
-
stpeter
Mondays can be crazy, I know :)
-
Fritzy
Mondays suck.
-
stpeter
heh
-
stpeter
MattJ: thanks for your helpful feedback -- I sense some revisions on the way
-
MattJ
You're welcome :)