XMPP Council - 2016-01-13

  1. psa


  2. Lance waves

  3. Lance

    it is time

  4. SamWhited


  5. Lance

    0) Roll call

  6. Dave Cridland


  7. Lance

    Tobi MattJ

  8. Tobi


  9. psa


  10. Lance

    There is currently nothing on the agenda, unless anyone as AOB.

  11. Lance

    We are still tracking the Jingle ICE XEP that was approved, but not yet published.

  12. MattJ


  13. Lance

    1) Date of next

  14. Lance


  15. MattJ


  16. Dave Cridland

    Works for me.

  17. Dave Cridland

    Who's coming to the Summit from the Council?

  18. Tobi


  19. SamWhited

    AOB: Whatever happened to deprecating privacy lists? Probably something I was supposed to do and forgot about

  20. m&m hopes he can get to another summit sometime

  21. Kev

    I'm not Council, but I'll be there.

  22. Dave Cridland

    m&m, They don't allow anyone with a beard on a plane anymore.

  23. Lance

    I will not be there this year

  24. m&m


  25. Tobi

    i'll be there

  26. m&m

    but Chirs Deering and Jerome should be able to help you all out

  27. m&m

    Chris even

  28. Dave Cridland

    Chairs Deering.

  29. Lance

    I believe MattJ signed up

  30. Dave Cridland

    I believe Ralph is in contact with Chris.

  31. m&m

    Yes, he is

  32. Dave Cridland

    Lance, No, Wild Matthew signed up.

  33. Lance

    Ah, right :)

  34. Tobi

    must be his good twin

  35. Lance

    2) AOB: Privacy lists

  36. MattJ

    Lance, yep, I'll be there

  37. m&m

    re jingle-ice — we'll get that published by next week

  38. Lance

    Were there still action items left to do here?

  39. MattJ

    as Wild Matthew

  40. SamWhited

    (might be nothing to discuss with privacy lists; I'm looking to see if there was some action that I or anyone else was supposed to do, but I can't remember)

  41. MattJ

    Grr, lag

  42. Dave Cridland

    I don't think we ever voted. I think we merely discussed on the list.

  43. MattJ

    I'm not sure if there was clear consensus

  44. MattJ

    translation from British: there was no clear consensus

  45. Dave Cridland

    If we do vote, I'd like to gather the user requirements that came from the discussion and see if we can come up with "modern" case-specific XEPs to handle them.

  46. Dave Cridland

    (ie, I'd vote not to deprecate it)

  47. Lance

    IIRC, the missing use case was blocking groups

  48. MattJ

    There was another - blocking non-roster contacts

  49. Dave Cridland

    And non-roster people.

  50. SamWhited

    I'd volunteer to add group/non-roster blocking to the blocking command XEP (blocking non-roster contacts appears to work for me, even if it's not compliant with the spec actually)

  51. Lance

    SamWhited: I'd suggest getting that discussion rolling again by proposing some updates to the blocking XEP then

  52. SamWhited

    Jinx. Will do.

  53. Lance

    3) AOB?

  54. Lance

    Sounds like a no

  55. Tobi

    none here

  56. Lance bangs gavel

  57. Lance

    thanks all

  58. Tobi

    thanks you Lance

  59. Kev

    SamWhited: I think Lance was probably there too.

  60. MattJ

    SamWhited, to be clear it's blocking *all* non-roster contacts

  61. SamWhited

    MattJ: ahh, gotcha, thanks.

  62. MattJ

    Some servers do it already (optionally), but it isn't per-user configurable

  63. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, Putting in asides into the minutes? That's disgraceful behaviour.

  64. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, Well done.

  65. MattJ

    Could be made so with ad-hoc commands, but the privacy-list supporters want a standard protocol

  66. SamWhited

    It was mentioned in the meeting by me :) it's legit.

  67. Dave Cridland

    Standardized ad-hoc would do it, mind.

  68. psa

    I have another question about handling the Jingle XEPs, mostly for the Editor Team but partly also for Lance. Unfortunately I worked on them all (166, 167, 176, 177) in a single branch, and then we forked 176 into a new XEP. I would be happy to set up separate branches for each XEP if that's easier to process. I think that I have 167 and 177 done but I'd like some feedback on the list for those changes, so posting temporary versions would be good (we used to do that at http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/ but haven't done so in a while, I think). 166 is close to done but Lance was interested in adding some implementation notes and I'm not sure where he stands with that. And then we need to publish the new / replacement jingle-ice spec. IMHO a good next step would be publishing both 167 and 177 in the temp dir.

  69. SamWhited

    > <domain> (the domain itself matches, as does any user@domain or domain/resource)

  70. SamWhited

    Am I missing something; that sounds like domain blocking IS implemented.

  71. SamWhited

    psa: I'd say it doesn't matter; separate branches would keep the commit history cleaner and make review easier, but it shouldn't be hard to process either way.

  72. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, Did we mention domain blocking?

  73. SamWhited

    Pretty sure that was one of the things people said… or at least that I was reading on the old topic.

  74. SamWhited goes to check the minutes he just sent out.

  75. Zash

    Hey, what's up? // I implemented blocking from scratch

  76. SamWhited

    Zash: Just discussing deprecation again; I was trying to address the things people said were missing from the blocking command.

  77. SamWhited

    deprecation of privacy lists, that is.

  78. Zash

    Right, I got that much

  79. SamWhited

    Ah, nope, it was groups, not domains. Nevermind.

  80. Zash

    Groups and blocking people by default IIRC

  81. SamWhited

    I really don't see the use for groups, just added complication IMO, but it's not that much complication, so I'll add it if the council thinks it's really necessary.

  82. SamWhited

    Actually, I change my mind, I'll bring it up on list again, but I think groups does just add needless complication and shouldn't be used that way. Now clients that get a block list have to do extra work to check if any given contact is a member of a group, that's a lot of extra logic over just checking if their JID is in a list.

  83. Dave Cridland

    SamWhited, The logic has to be there for PEP nodes with access-model roster, anyway.

  84. SamWhited

    Hmm… fair point.

  85. Zash

    SamWhited: It gets more complicated for clients if they have a group that is blocked and you add someone to it

  86. Zash

    And potential cross-client-sync issues

  87. SamWhited

    Do groups not do any sort of pub-sub? I should go check how that works.

  88. SamWhited

    (not the XEP pub sub, but just getting a push down when a group changes)

  89. Zash

    SamWhited: Sure

  90. Zash

    But someone creating a group and blocking it with one client that does this thing will be very confused when they add someone to that group from another client and they don't get blocked.

  91. Zash

    FWIW I agree this is not something I think groups should be used for

  92. Lance

    psa: +1 to publishing tmp versions for review

  93. psa

    SamWhited / Lance OK I'll get busier so we can finish the Jingle revision process

  94. Lance

    psa: what all is actually left?

  95. Lance

    other than expanding 166 with implementation guidance?

  96. Lance

    and more diagrams :)

  97. fippo

    and evil things you do not want to talk aboutÃ? :-p

  98. psa


  99. psa

    Lance: I think that's mostly it

  100. Lance

    i'd love to talk about them

  101. Lance

    psa: ah, good. those changes don't need to be done before the slew of other xeps are published then, but i'll start writing

  102. Lance

    there is however, one item i'll bring up on list later: adding a framed transport type in addition to datagram and streaming

  103. psa

    I would also like to triple-check the jingle-ice spec against RFC 5245, RFC 6544, and draft-ietf-ice-trickle

  104. fippo

    psa: i'll see if I can find some time for that

  105. psa

    OK: http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0166-1.2.html and http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0167-1.1.html and http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0177-1.2.html

  106. psa

    Lance: super

  107. psa

    and of course, it would be great to get feedback from folks like Fippo and Xander

  108. psa

    I'll post to standards@ with the links

  109. psa

    message sent

  110. Lance

    psa: thanks for being awesome, as always

  111. psa


  112. psa

    just putting one foot in front of the other, as always ;-)