KevIt started badly without much of a plan, I appointed myself 'in charge of stuff', there was a plan, it went very well.
MattJ+1
FritzyI read the thread on it. Sounds like you made it productive.
KevWe learned a bit about what we need to do next time, and discussion is starting to happen about this on the interop list.
Fritzyany interesting results?
KevThere's a report on the XSF blog.
dwdI'd note from the floor that the interop testing done on SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS was of quite some importance outside the XSF.
ralphmhas joined
KevFritzy: Well, at the end of the week, everyone participating was more conformant than at the start.
KevWhich is quite a result, relaly.
Kev*really
linuxwolf/nod
Fritzysounds good to me!
dwdI'd also note that another interop event I've been invoved in increased its setup time to an entire week for the third event, so our spending two days on that is a *small* amount of time, relatively speaking.
KevIt was surprising to me that the general standard of TLS handling was so high.
Fritzybetween servers
Fritzy?
KevSo it does seem, largely, a deployment issue these days that s2s is often insecure.
KevYes, s2s.
MattJAgreed
KevThe only client that did the scripted testing was Swift.
KevThere've been suggestions that the next interop should look at other low level stuff, with internationalisation seeming a sensible choice.
dwdThat's not to say that was the only client involved, though - a few used parts of the test network for various things.
MattJwhich is fine
Kevdwd: Yes, I'm assuming everyone can read the report.
FritzyWill do.
dwdKev, It's on the new-fangled web thing, I didn't know everyone had it.
KevI don't think there's much more to say about it, but I think Council could consider whether it has a roll in the test plan for next time.
dwd(Or even a role)
KevMaybe it doesn't, but it would seem to me that of the various XSF bodies, Council are the ones most likely to be thinking about interoperability requirements.
Fritzythat makes sense.
MattJIndeed
dwdThere was also the suggestion concerning the server and client lists and the relationship with the interops.
MattJNext time I think perhaps council should draw up the tests
MattJand make them known further in advance of the interop
KevYes, there was also discussion that clients and servers shouldn't be listed on xmpp.org unless they participate in the interop events, but that doesn't sound Councilish.
KevMattJ: Yep.
KevRighty, I think that's the interop done.
ralphmKev: agreed
Kevlinuxwolf: What did you want to add to the agenda
ralphmI could imagine some interopmatrix
Kev?
dwdI certainly think that indicating on those lists which ones *did* participate seems sensible.
FritzyAlso, test preparation can be an open thing a week ahead of time -- something people are available to help with before testing is expected to start -- in muc and everything.
remkodwd: *nod* It's a plus if you do, not a bad thing if you don't
linuxwolfsome upcoming items of work
KevGo for it.
KevFritzy: Yes, this is all good. Jump on the interop list and discuss :)
Kevlinuxwolf: ... which are?
linuxwolfso, we're working out some issues and their solutions regarding multiple resources
Kevlinuxwolf: Have you seen protoxep-multiple-clients?
linuxwolfKev: yes…since you just sent it to me
linuxwolf(-:
remkodwd: that looks even more verbose than the vcard before, nice
dwdPSA's the responsible AD. Plus we could kick off an experimental XEP referencing the draft.
ralphmit seems extensible, so hooray
linuxwolfdwd: the XEP is started…just needs to get submitted
Kevlinuxwolf: Ok, I was trying to solve the same problems (I think) that you're trying to solve with carbons et al (It was carbons I wanted to update, not Mine, my bad).
dwdremko, "It'll compress well"™
linuxwolfKev: no worries…let's you and I talk more about that
KevSounds like a plan.
linuxwolfI think I'll be taking authorship of a couple of these
linuxwolfresource locking best practices, carbons, mine-ing
stpeterhas joined
KevAnd we'll wait to see the third vcard XEP proposal :)
stpetersigh
stpetergot stuck in a massive traffic jam
linuxwolfKev: heh…at least #3 will actually use a vCard spec
Fritzystpeter: shitty
Kevstpeter: I'm about to, which is why I'm keen to keep Council short.
stpeternod
linuxwolfif we're counting infobits as #2
MattJstpeter, should have walked like I did :)
KevAt least dwd is driving this time.
dwdstpeter, You need to use better congestion control.
KevRight, so, that's probably us doneish on that.
ralphmlinuxwolf: aaaarghhh
stpeterforgot his phone at home, otherwise would've contacted linuxwolf
linuxwolfor a better routing algorithm (-
KevNext item: Next meeting.
KevWe're halfway through December, I suggest we skip meeting until the new year.
stpeterlooks at the calendar
linuxwolf/agreed
stpeteryeah
Fritzy22nd shouldn't be a big deal though?
Kev5th Jan sounds good to me.
MattJThat would give me a chance to get some XEPs submitted :)
linuxwolfI'm <presence type='unavailable'/> until 01/03 anyway
Fritzyok
stpeterI might be able to get some protoXEPs and edits done before the next meeting
linuxwolfwhat stpeter said (-:
dwdlinuxwolf, That's not an RFC 3339 compliant date format, naughty.
KevMattJ: I intend to submit the 136bis related stuff once you're ready to submit 136bis.
stpeter(protoxep for muc error elements)
ralphmFor the record: no -1 on publishing remote-auth
Fritzy+1 for Jan 5th
linuxwolfdwd: 20110103T08:00:00-07:00
stpeteradds January 5 to the calendar
remkolinuxwolf: thanks. Now us europeans can understand what you mean
Fritzyralphm: would be interested in reading your critique
Kevlinuxwolf: I think that's an hour off.
MattJKev, excellent
ralphmFritzy: 'no -1'
Fritzyoh right
Fritzylack of veto
Fritzy:)
Kev9am for -7, isn't it?
Kev1600 Real Time.
ralphmKev: did you catch that for the tally?
stpeterit's 9 AM in Denver, 8 AM for Fritzy
linuxwolfKev: noting when I can be expected back online, not the next meeting (-:
Fritzyyup
Kevralphm: I did, ta.
Kevlinuxwolf: sneaky.
linuxwolf(-;
linuxwolfit's sinister…just like my handedness
KevOk, so, next meeting 5th Jan 1600GMT.
KevAny other Business?
linuxwolfoh, FOSDEM
dwdlinuxwolf, Latin gags. I imagine your and PSA's classics-related humour has them rolling on the floor in Cisco.
linuxwolfwho from this council is thinking of attending
linuxwolf?
MattJ<--
dwdKev will be.
Kevlinuxwolf: I'm assuming I will be.
linuxwolfhehe
dwdKev, You are attending.
stpeterheh
KevJolly good.
FritzyWish I could make it this year, but since I'll be in Italy shortly after, it isn't in the budget.
remkodwd: you?
linuxwolfdwd: "Good to be the King" (-:
dwdKev, I forgot to mention.
stpeterand we know how much Kev loves Brussels
dwdremko, I am, too. \o/
MattJ:)
stpeterbut at least he has a few good memories of the place :)
ralphmI'm attending of course
KevAbout || this much.
remkodwd: \o/
Fritzythey have good beer
linuxwolfI need to find business justification before I can commit to being at FOSDEM
KevAnd I caught this awful 'having a wife' illness there, too.
KevBut yes.
ralphmlinuxwolf: does "meeting ralphm" count?
Kevlinuxwolf: I'll be there :)
linuxwolf(-:
KevJob done.
linuxwolfif we have an "official council meeting", that can help (-:
Fritzyaw man
ralphmlinuxwolf: done deal
stpeterlinuxwolf: we can find some customers for you to meet with :)
dwdlinuxwolf, Kurt wants to discuss digsig in XMPP, which is relevant.
linuxwolfI'm working on my list…but every little thing helps
KevI expect there to be some informal interop, but I'm not sure if it'll be formal.
linuxwolfstpeter: the good thing about Cisco is, it's global, so I can always find someone I need to talk with
KevRight.
Fritzywe did Jingle interop the year before last
ralphmlinuxwolf: is being-council-member considered part of your job?
linuxwolfralphm: I believe it is, yes (-:
ralphmralphm: well, there you go
linuxwolfheh
KevOr here you come, or something.
KevAnyway.
KevAny other any other business?
linuxwolfI'm done...really!
Fritzyno sir
ralphm5 min. to spare. nice
KevThere are advantages to having a Chair with the attention span of a
Kevoooh, butterflies.
KevRight!
linuxwolfSQUIRREL!
KevI'll write up some meetings of the minute tomorrow morning.
linuxwolf/nod
KevThanks all
Kevgavels the bang.
linuxwolfKev: and I'll begin the out-of-band discussion shortly
MattJMerci
linuxwolf¡gracias!
Kevlinuxwolf: Thanks. I like multiple-clients, but don't have an implementation yet, so it's not too late to change my mind :)