XMPP Council - 2010-12-15

wow, I'm early for once

:)

And a Fritzy has appeared!

(-:

Three down.

Matt is joining.

Ralph has also been poked, but not responded.

So, shall we start?

1) Roll call

present

present

presents!

Righty.

2) Agenda bashing.

nope

ditto

a note at the end from me

Ok.

3) Interop summary.

So, the interop event happened.

It started badly without much of a plan, I appointed myself 'in charge of stuff', there was a plan, it went very well.

+1

I read the thread on it. Sounds like you made it productive.

We learned a bit about what we need to do next time, and discussion is starting to happen about this on the interop list.

any interesting results?

There's a report on the XSF blog.

I'd note from the floor that the interop testing done on SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS was of quite some importance outside the XSF.

Fritzy: Well, at the end of the week, everyone participating was more conformant than at the start.

Which is quite a result, relaly.

*really

/nod

sounds good to me!

I'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.

It was surprising to me that the general standard of TLS handling was so high.

between servers

?

So it does seem, largely, a deployment issue these days that s2s is often insecure.

Yes, s2s.

Agreed

The only client that did the scripted testing was Swift.

There've been suggestions that the next interop should look at other low level stuff, with internationalisation seeming a sensible choice.

That's not to say that was the only client involved, though - a few used parts of the test network for various things.

which is fine

dwd: Yes, I'm assuming everyone can read the report.

Will do.

Kev, It's on the new-fangled web thing, I didn't know everyone had it.

I 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.

(Or even a role)

Maybe 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.

that makes sense.

Indeed

There was also the suggestion concerning the server and client lists and the relationship with the interops.

Next time I think perhaps council should draw up the tests

and make them known further in advance of the interop

Yes, 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.

MattJ: Yep.

Righty, I think that's the interop done.

Kev: agreed

linuxwolf: What did you want to add to the agenda

I could imagine some interopmatrix

?

I certainly think that indicating on those lists which ones *did* participate seems sensible.

Also, 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.

dwd: *nod* It's a plus if you do, not a bad thing if you don't

some upcoming items of work

Go for it.

Fritzy: Yes, this is all good. Jump on the interop list and discuss :)

linuxwolf: ... which are?

so, we're working out some issues and their solutions regarding multiple resources

Ah.

http://doomsong.co.uk/extensions/render/multiple-clients.html ?

plus a refresh of vcard

linuxwolf: refresh?

well, since an XML vcard specification is actually going to make it out of WG discussion, some of us feel it's time to also update (-:

linuxwolf: I did poke Joe about some updates I wanted to do to Mine a few months back, but he never replied.

Kev: he's busy, and that brings me to the next piece

linuxwolf: That sounds new-fangled and exciting.

linuxwolf: sounds nice, but any indication when?

ralphm: it's an IETF WG, so that's still unknown (-:

(also, does it include some way to indicate a JID?)

linuxwolf: it seems this is kinda pending since 2000

most of what we're doing with multiple resources is best practices, plus a bias toward message carbons

ralphm: yes, but now there's actually consensus

it's truly amazing to me (-:

I'm trying to find the people who will actual work on these specs, but it looks like most of them will be moi

not holding my breath C-:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardxml-06

^^

linuxwolf: Have you seen protoxep-multiple-clients?

Kev: yes…since you just sent it to me

(-:

dwd: that looks even more verbose than the vcard before, nice

PSA's the responsible AD. Plus we could kick off an experimental XEP referencing the draft.

it seems extensible, so hooray

dwd: the XEP is started…just needs to get submitted

linuxwolf: 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).

remko, "It'll compress well"™

Kev: no worries…let's you and I talk more about that

Sounds like a plan.

I think I'll be taking authorship of a couple of these

resource locking best practices, carbons, mine-ing

And we'll wait to see the third vcard XEP proposal :)

sigh

got stuck in a massive traffic jam

Kev: heh…at least #3 will actually use a vCard spec

stpeter: shitty

stpeter: I'm about to, which is why I'm keen to keep Council short.

nod

if we're counting infobits as #2

stpeter, should have walked like I did :)

At least dwd is driving this time.

stpeter, You need to use better congestion control.

Right, so, that's probably us doneish on that.

linuxwolf: aaaarghhh

or a better routing algorithm (-

Next item: Next meeting.

We're halfway through December, I suggest we skip meeting until the new year.

/agreed

yeah

22nd shouldn't be a big deal though?

5th Jan sounds good to me.

That would give me a chance to get some XEPs submitted :)

I'm <presence type='unavailable'/> until 01/03 anyway

ok

I might be able to get some protoXEPs and edits done before the next meeting

what stpeter said (-:

linuxwolf, That's not an RFC 3339 compliant date format, naughty.

MattJ: I intend to submit the 136bis related stuff once you're ready to submit 136bis.

(protoxep for muc error elements)

For the record: no -1 on publishing remote-auth

+1 for Jan 5th

dwd: 20110103T08:00:00-07:00

linuxwolf: thanks. Now us europeans can understand what you mean

ralphm: would be interested in reading your critique

linuxwolf: I think that's an hour off.

Kev, excellent

Fritzy: 'no -1'

oh right

lack of veto

:)

9am for -7, isn't it?

1600 Real Time.

Kev: did you catch that for the tally?

it's 9 AM in Denver, 8 AM for Fritzy

Kev: noting when I can be expected back online, not the next meeting (-:

yup

ralphm: I did, ta.

linuxwolf: sneaky.

(-;

it's sinister…just like my handedness

Ok, so, next meeting 5th Jan 1600GMT.

Any other Business?

oh, FOSDEM

linuxwolf, Latin gags. I imagine your and PSA's classics-related humour has them rolling on the floor in Cisco.

who from this council is thinking of attending

?

<--

Kev will be.

linuxwolf: I'm assuming I will be.

hehe

Kev, You are attending.

heh

Jolly good.

Wish I could make it this year, but since I'll be in Italy shortly after, it isn't in the budget.

dwd: you?

dwd: "Good to be the King" (-:

Kev, I forgot to mention.

and we know how much Kev loves Brussels

remko, I am, too. \o/

:)

but at least he has a few good memories of the place :)

I'm attending of course

About || this much.

dwd: \o/

they have good beer

I need to find business justification before I can commit to being at FOSDEM

And I caught this awful 'having a wife' illness there, too.

But yes.

linuxwolf: does "meeting ralphm" count?

linuxwolf: I'll be there :)

(-:

Job done.

if we have an "official council meeting", that can help (-:

aw man

linuxwolf: done deal

linuxwolf: we can find some customers for you to meet with :)

linuxwolf, Kurt wants to discuss digsig in XMPP, which is relevant.

I'm working on my list…but every little thing helps

I expect there to be some informal interop, but I'm not sure if it'll be formal.

stpeter: the good thing about Cisco is, it's global, so I can always find someone I need to talk with

Right.

we did Jingle interop the year before last

linuxwolf: is being-council-member considered part of your job?

ralphm: I believe it is, yes (-:

ralphm: well, there you go

heh

Or here you come, or something.

Anyway.

Any other any other business?

I'm done...really!

no sir

5 min. to spare. nice

There are advantages to having a Chair with the attention span of a

oooh, butterflies.

Right!

SQUIRREL!

I'll write up some meetings of the minute tomorrow morning.

/nod

Thanks all

Kev: and I'll begin the out-of-band discussion shortly

Merci

¡gracias!

linuxwolf: Thanks. I like multiple-clients, but don't have an implementation yet, so it's not too late to change my mind :)

Anyway, there is a road to be hit.

gn all.

bye!

ttfn

Kev: I want it in my n900