- bear has joined
- bear has left
- mlundblad has joined
- Neustradamus has joined
- linuxwolf has joined
- stpeter has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
-
stpeter
T-12 minutes?
-
Kev
Yep.
- linuxwolf goes to renew client cert
- stpeter stopped signing his email
-
linuxwolf
then who have I been talking to all this time?!?!!!111!!!eleventy11!! (-:
-
Kev
I sign my mail either Best, /K or /K
-
stpeter
hehe
-
Kev
Does that count?
-
linuxwolf
heh
- Wojtek has joined
- ralphm has joined
-
ralphm
hi
-
stpeter
hi Ralph!
-
Kev
Hi Ralph.
- linuxwolf waves
- erik has joined
- MattJ has joined
- MattJ waves
-
Kev
Hi Matt.
-
MattJ
This meeting can't go past 11:30, or I have to run :)
-
Kev
Damn, it's alread 15:54 now.
-
stpeter
Mr. EDT!
-
MattJ
Oh well
-
MattJ
stpeter, my watch is still in GMT :)
-
stpeter
heh
-
MattJ
But my schedule isn't
-
linuxwolf
(-:
- Astro has joined
-
Kev
Dingding.
-
Kev
So, onwards.
-
Kev
1) Roll call.
-
Kev
I'm free!
-
linuxwolf
presente
-
MattJ
Present
-
ralphm
:-)
-
Kev
2) Agenda Ba^w^whttp://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/compliance2012.html Accept as XEP?
-
linuxwolf
+1
-
MattJ
+1
-
stpeter
needs some work, clearly
-
Kev
stpeter: Yes, but that can be done in place.
-
stpeter
righ
-
stpeter
right even
-
ralphm
+1
-
Kev
I think the 198 discussion is interesting. I'm actually in favour of that, despite it making neither M-Link nor Swift compliant (neither do Resume).
-
Kev
(I'm +1, to be clear)
-
Kev
3) http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/commenting.html Accept as XEP?
-
ralphm
Kev: agreed on 198
-
Kev
I've asked the BuddyCloud guys to comment on this on list, because it seems like their area of expertise; I have no objection to publication at the moment.
-
MattJ
I haven't read it in detail, but it seems sane, I'm +1
-
linuxwolf
+1 also
-
ralphm
+1 on commenting. Very interesting, although I want to go through it a with a fine comb
-
stpeter
(we did have discussion about splitting 198 into two pieces, but Matthew convinced me that acking and resuming belong together)
-
ralphm
stpeter: nod
-
Kev
I think they do.
-
MattJ
stpeter, +1
-
Kev
You really want both features.
-
MattJ
I started the discussion :)
-
stpeter
yes
-
stpeter
MattJ: faulty memory
-
Kev
4) LC on XEP-0296?
-
Kev
I think I'll have comments on this on-list, but I'm happy to LC it.
-
MattJ
+1 for LC
-
linuxwolf
obvious +1 from me (-:
-
ralphm
+1
-
Kev
5) Date of next meeting.
-
ralphm
should it also be in compliance?
-
Kev
SBTSBC?
-
MattJ
SBTSBC++
- Astro prepares a comment on the Commenting XEP...
-
linuxwolf
ralphm: that's my thought…and why I'd like LC to be sooner rather than later
-
linuxwolf
Kev: WFM
-
Kev
ralphm: Well, there's a discussion. I think it'd be worth seeing how the LC goes.
-
Kev
Astro: Thanks.
-
ralphm
Kev: agreed
-
Kev
I think that's everyone agreed on date.
-
Kev
6) Any other business.
-
stpeter
I like "Users leave comments on just about anything" :)
-
Kev
I liked the opening sentence.
-
stpeter
hmm, AOB
-
stpeter
are we closer to done on dialback?
-
stpeter
I can incorporate the one fix from fippo and push out a new version
-
stpeter
seems like we'd want a second LC
-
Kev
It's not clear to me whether fippo is now happy with it (with his fix pushed).
-
linuxwolf
stpeter: /nod … unless you want to act unilaterally (-: /ducks
-
MattJ
He's happy with little at the moment :)
-
stpeter
it's not clear to me if fippo is ever happy ;-)
- Neustradamus has left
-
Kev
Not that this is necessarily a requirement, but I think knowing is a requirement :)
-
stpeter
I have a broader question about dialback, though
-
stpeter
if we have a few minutes
- MattJ is all ears
-
Kev
I don't think we've had the situation before where authors have been is such disagreement.
-
Kev
So how to resolve it is a little new to me.
-
linuxwolf
there was one time in the distant past...
-
stpeter
Kev: new for me, too
-
ralphm
happiness is overrated?
-
ralphm
hah
-
linuxwolf
hehe
-
stpeter
so
-
Kev
linuxwolf: Oh. A memory stirs. XHTML-IM?
-
stpeter
the broader issue is: does this belong in the XMPP WG?
-
stpeter
I think it might
-
stpeter
because of the DNA/DNSSEC work
- Wojtek has left
-
Kev
stpeter: I think that's a credible argument, at least.
-
ralphm
good point
-
linuxwolf
yes
-
ralphm
kinda funny that we pulled it out of an RFC
-
stpeter
so I think it might make sense to fold DNA/DNSSEC in with the dialback spec and the bidi extension
-
stpeter
and publish it all as an RFC on XMPP S2S
-
stpeter
ralphm: right :)
-
MattJ
That would actually be nice
-
Kev
stpeter: I can see drawbacks to this.
-
stpeter
the IETF security mafia objected to dialback years ago because "it's not secure" -- but if we use DNSSEC then in fact dialback has useful security properties
-
Kev
Largely that you're pushing the experimental in with the established, and it risks how you judge that implementations are compliant.
-
stpeter
Kev: right
-
stpeter
hmm
-
Kev
I would be a little reluctant to make a move that would mean we have a sum total of zero servers that implement S2S.
-
MattJ
Nothing on the internet is "secure" :)
-
ralphm
Kev: nod
-
ralphm
Yeah, I don't care for the non-secure argument, we all know the trade-offs
-
stpeter
Kev: another approach would be to do all this work at the XSF, and then eventually publish an RFC when we publish 6120 bis a few years from now
-
Kev
So, if the RFC route is taken, I think it's probably better to publish two - one with what we have, and one with what we want.
-
stpeter
but splitting things across IETF and XSF feels a bit odd here
-
stpeter
anyway
-
stpeter
I just wanted to raise the issue
-
Kev
ralphm: Well, the IETF security guys *have* to complain that it's not secure, that's their purpose. What then happens is a matter for pragmatism.
-
stpeter
there will be discussions in Quebec City about DNA/DNSSEC
-
linuxwolf
it also matters what your definition of "secure" is
-
Kev
stpeter: I'm not opposed to the idea, at least at first glance, - just the implementation of rolling everything into one RFC.
-
linuxwolf
which is hard to get them to nail down sometimes (-:
-
ralphm
Haven't we earlier taken initial work as XEPs to then incorporate them into an RFC?
-
stpeter
ralphm: yes indeed
-
linuxwolf
ralphm: yes, privacy
-
ralphm
I don't see how it hurts to first have a few XEPs, worked on by the same people as in the WG
-
linuxwolf
the DNSSEC/DNA stuff will happen the IETF with or without us
-
ralphm
unless there are legal issues around this
-
stpeter
and roster versioning and so on
-
stpeter
well, the XMPP WG is just the folks who participate
-
ralphm
my point
-
stpeter
the IETF is not some monolithic entity
-
linuxwolf
true
-
linuxwolf
well, it's not a 1:1 mapping of standard@ and xmppwg@ commenters
-
stpeter
Kev: your point about two documents is well taken
-
Kev
So, what do we need to discuss about this here? Anything, or was it an airing?
-
stpeter
Kev: as in, publish dialback-core and dna-using-dialback with a reference to dialback-core
-
linuxwolf
two documents actually sounds like a good way to go…whether they're XEPs or RFCs
-
ralphm
Can't we just have the discussion on the xmppwg mailinglist and defere standards@ to that? We have multiple different lists for specific interest areas
-
Kev
stpeter: Yes, with bibi probably belonging in the latter, because that's also new and exciting.
-
stpeter
so for now I think it's fine to proceed with XEP-0220, but it would be nice to get it done
-
stpeter
Kev: yes
-
linuxwolf
and you want some level of assurance above "(non SEC) DNS lookups worked"
-
linuxwolf
(for bidi)
-
stpeter
and eventually I think we might republish 220 back at the IETF, but there's no hurry about it (could be done when we do the great republish of 6120bis, 6121bis, 6122bis, etc.)
-
stpeter
(if we do :)
-
ralphm
I have to cut out the meeting now to catch my train. Thanks all.
-
linuxwolf
/nod
-
stpeter
yep
-
stpeter
ok
-
stpeter
that's all from me
-
stpeter
no action required
-
Kev
Thanks Ralph.
-
stpeter
just an airing
-
Kev
I think we're done anyway :)
-
linuxwolf
nice and short
-
Kev
So, any other any other business?
-
stpeter
any other AOB? ;-)
-
MattJ
No AOB
-
stpeter
none here
-
linuxwolf
not directly council related, per se (-:
-
Kev
Fab.
-
Kev
In that case, thanks all!
- Kev gabs the bangle.
-
linuxwolf
need to add my comments to the "Great XSF Reset" discussion
-
linuxwolf
(-:
- stpeter loves the word "fab" and needs to use it more often but can't quite bring it off with that British panache
-
Kev
linuxwolf: I think there we may have a gift that keeps on giving.
-
stpeter
I haven't yet read any of the messages that came in on that thread overnight
-
Kev
Most were me.
-
linuxwolf
Kev: as long as it's not "We need a better name than XSF" again…and again…and again...
-
Kev
linuxwolf: Those Jabber guys are evil.
-
linuxwolf
exactly
-
Kev
I was there, I remember :)
-
linuxwolf
they should be hoisted by their own petards
-
linuxwolf
(-:
-
stpeter
Those Jabber guys *were* evil.
-
stpeter
not sure if they've reformed since then
-
linuxwolf
at least one hasn't...apparently
-
Kev
I think at least one raised issue is important.
- linuxwolf goes to read and comment on emails
- ralphm has left
-
Kev
There is a perception, at least from some, that Council and Board aren't doing their jobs, and we clearly need to address this.
-
Kev
Or, well, I assert that we need to address this.
-
linuxwolf
agreed
-
stpeter
Kev: I'll wait for your minutes before issuing a LC on 296, and I think we might need to clarify the basis for such actions, but in general I think it is acceptable for a simple majority of Council members present to make a decision to issue a Last Call (i.e., no need to wait for Fritzy to weigh in)
-
stpeter
actually I think the Council is doing a fine job
-
Kev
Given that LC isn't an advancement action, per se, I think I'd buy that.
-
stpeter
right
-
stpeter
I think http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/policies-and-procedures/ is not quite clear on the matter
-
Kev
I think Council is, in some ways, doing better than it did at one point.
-
stpeter
agreed!
-
Kev
I feel it's taken how ever many years it is to start to work out what the Chair should be doing, and try to start doing it.
-
Kev
I think if the outcome of this debate is that Board and Council become more accountable, this is a good thing.
-
stpeter
well the Board's mandate is not as clear as the Council's, which is part of the challenge
-
stpeter
and, for the record, I think Kev does an excellent job as Council Chair
-
Kev
stpeter: It's true, but it also makes it hard to not wonder if they're pulling their weight. Their mandate to be doing stuff may not be clear, but the perception that unless stuff is being done they're not meeting their mandate seems hard to counter.
-
Kev
Aww, thanks.
-
Kev
Council is almost as simple as "Are there being votes on XEPs? Please tick as appropriate".
-
Kev
(To judge whether the job is being done)
-
stpeter
:)
-
stpeter
I do think it would help to clarify what a council "vote" is
-
stpeter
and when the two-week period applies
-
Kev
Yes.
-
stpeter
e.g., perhaps that applies only to advancement, not to acceptance (0.1) or last calls
-
stpeter
that's how I'd think of it
-
Kev
I would be happy with something like: Acceptance you have until the meeting to complain. Advancement you have a fortnight after the meeting.
-
Kev
Or something.
-
Kev
Although as I noted on list, if we were to do the former we'd need to not count submissions made 30seconds before the meeting.
-
stpeter
right
-
stpeter
we'd need all submissions to happen a week before
-
Kev
I do like the idea of people being able to autosubmit their stuff, and authors being able to autoupdate their Experimentals, and things.
-
Kev
I realise I have commit access to the repository, but I don't have access (or have access but not authority) to publish a new version.
-
stpeter
not sure we have enough publication activity to warrant work on automated tools, although I have no objection to doing so
-
Kev
Setting up an email address to which you can send new versions, or a web form through which you can upload, or whatever, and have everything happen automagically sounds terribly swish.
-
Kev
I accept there may well be an issue of perception rather than efficacy here.
-
stpeter
heh
-
stpeter
the IETF has tools for that
-
stpeter
http://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/
-
Kev
Right, I'm aware of it, although haven't used it.
-
stpeter
Kev: I'd be happy to work with you, via the list or not, on revisions to http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xmpp-council/policies-and-procedures/
-
stpeter
proposed revisions for review and approval by the rest of the Council, that is
-
Kev
Thanks. I think the best thing is probably to wait a short while for the list discussion to die down (maybe it already has, or maybe it'll errupt now those Merkin types have worken up) and see what seems prudent from that.
-
stpeter
sure
-
stpeter
speaking of which, I need to catch up :)
-
stpeter
but first I need to wash my breakfast dishes, brb
-
Kev
Enjoy!
-
Kev
I'm looking forward to dinner right now ;)
- bear has joined
-
stpeter
OT: it's starnge that there's no equivalent for "bon appetit" in English... http://www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/bonappetit.htm
-
stpeter
strange, even
- stpeter goes back to his email client
-
Kev
Oh, there is, isn't there?
-
Kev
"Enjoy"
-
stpeter
right
-
stpeter
there must be some old English phrase to bring back
- bear has left
-
Kev
Right, let's see if I can get those minutes out quickly.
-
Kev
stpeter: Sorry, I realise I wasn't clear earlier in AOB. I'm happy with the namespacing for 220, as I said on list at the time, I'm not blocking on that.
-
stpeter
right, I understood
-
Kev
I think there were no actions arising from that AOB. Is that your understanding?
-
stpeter
yes
-
stpeter
agreed
- erik has left
- mlundblad has left
- linuxwolf has left
- bear has joined
- bear has left
- bear has joined
- bear has left
- mlundblad has joined
- Neustradamus has joined
- linuxwolf has joined
- stpeter has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- linuxwolf has left
- linuxwolf has joined
- Wojtek has joined
- ralphm has joined
- erik has joined
- MattJ has joined
- Astro has joined
- Neustradamus has left
- Wojtek has left
- ralphm has left
- bear has joined
- bear has left
- erik has left
- mlundblad has left
- linuxwolf has left
- bear has joined
- bear has left