i didn’t send out an explicit agenda for today; but we are going to use last weeks agenda
daniel
3) Editors update
daniel
a) Proposed XMPP Extension: WebSocket S2S
(https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/websocket-s2s.html)
daniel
b) Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP over QUIC
(https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/xmpp-over-quic.html)
larma
Had no time to read but love the initiative :)
daniel
quick reminder to the editor (no rush I know you are on holiday) that we wanted to start a last call
daniel
for 215
daniel
4) Items for voting
daniel
b) Proposed XMPP Extension: XMPP over QUIC
(https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/xmpp-over-quic.html)
jonas’
daniel, thanks, I noted it in the spreadsheet of doom and will hopefully remember to look at it next week
moparisthebest
+1 (obviously)
Ge0rG
on-list
jonas’
why do we start with 4b?
daniel
as a developer I understand the "just do everything rfc xyz is doing except" but I'm not sure this is correct form
daniel
copy paste error. sorry
jonas’
I like the idea, +1.
daniel
ignore the above feedback because that's for 4a
daniel
i’m +1 on xmpp over quic
pprrkshas joined
moparisthebest
the risk of copy+pasting from the other RFC is that something is missed or wrong, I guess
daniel
i'm assuming larma is on list too
daniel
a) Proposed XMPP Extension: WebSocket S2S
(https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/websocket-s2s.html)
moparisthebest
+1
daniel
now my feedback applies:
as a developer I understand the "just do everything rfc xyz is doing except" but I'm not sure this is correct form
jonas’
I... I have ethical issues with this and I'll need to ponder on-list.
jonas’
A proper section on "motivation" may convince me, but I note that this is missing completely.
moparisthebest
I think I put that https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/websocket-s2s.html#usecases
Ge0rG
on-list
jonas’
I don't scroll that far to find motivation :-).
daniel
does anyone else feel that this should rather go into a new version of rfc 7395?
jonas’
ah that too, yes
daniel
and/or be an informational xep?
daniel
plus it creates ietfs namespaces?
moparisthebest
eventually they should probably both be RFCs, I'm completly unfamiliar with that process though
daniel
which i think we are not allowed to do?
jonas’
we're most certainly not
daniel
moparisthebest, i understand that that's why I was offering "informational" xep as a cheap alternative
moparisthebest
it's that or live with a tmp namespace forever :)
daniel
with a different namespace
jonas’
moparisthebest, could also use urn:xmpp:...?
jonas’
(which we own)
daniel
I think in it's current form I have to be -1
moparisthebest
could also just use jabber:server ? :P
moparisthebest
re: "just do what RFC X says" I think there is prior art there, ie https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7858 which says "just do TLS like RFC X and then just do DNS like RFC Y"
moparisthebest
daniel, just based on the namespace or what else?
daniel
a combination of the namespace thing (which would be an easy) fix. and it just not feeling right. I'm not familiar with the "prior art" you mentioned. I guess i should read into that
daniel
maybe "on list" until i checked that out
moparisthebest
re: namespace any objections to jabber:server ?
daniel
but fwiw I don’t think creating an RFC (with your name not a number. is there a term for experimental rfc?) is super hard
moparisthebest
yea I gotta look into that one day...
daniel
that just feels like a more proper way to handle that.
or as I said make it informational to get around the hacky nature
daniel
but i also don’t want to be the only one blocking this. so let's see how the other votes turn out
jonas’
I'm happy to be a second blocker if you need one ;)
moparisthebest
just making it informational so we can ignore things seems like a hack
jonas’
yeah, I agree on that moparisthebest
jonas’
I don't think making it informational solves anything here
daniel
ok; but let's move on. i'll read up on the other rfcs moparisthebest mentioned and vote on list
daniel
5) Pending votes
none
daniel
6) Date of next
jonas’
+1w wfm
daniel
+1w wfm
moparisthebest
+1w wfm
daniel
7) AOB
jonas’
none from me
daniel
8) Close
thank you all
jonas’
thanks daniel
moparisthebest
thanks all !
Kev
Various things have migrated from XEP to RFC, or back again, in the past, FWIW.
Kev
So to my mind unless Council/XSF lacks the ability to review it sensibly (which is sometimes the case with security things), I don't think something starting as a XEP and migrating over would be the end of the world.
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
moparisthebest
thanks Kev that's how I'd prefer to do it anyway :)
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas left
pep.has left
pep.has joined
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
Ray22has left
Kevhas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas left
debaclehas left
Wojtekhas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
Kevhas joined
pprrkshas joined
Kevhas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
debaclehas joined
Samhas left
pprrkshas joined
Samhas joined
Kevhas joined
Kevhas left
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
Wojtekhas joined
pprrkshas left
Wojtekhas left
Ingolfhas left
Kevhas joined
Ray22has joined
Kevhas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
Ray22has left
Kevhas joined
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
Kevhas left
msavoritiashas left
vaulorhas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
SouLhas left
Kevhas joined
pprrkshas joined
vaulorhas joined
SouLhas joined
pprrkshas left
moparisthebest
re: s2s websocket namespace, I do include the contact of who to register namespaces with on there, unsure if it works like ALPN where the editor just rings them up and they register it or not though
Zash
The starting point to look for who's responsible for some urn:* would be https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml
Kevhas left
Tobiashas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
pprrkshas left
Kevhas joined
Kevhas left
pprrkshas joined
marc0shas left
marc0shas joined
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
moparisthebest
So it's just expert review and look who the team leader is:
> Peter Saint-Andre
moparisthebest
We can probably contact that guy!!!! :)
pprrkshas left
pprrkshas joined
moparisthebest
Turns out jabber: isn't registered, we are all breaking the law!
pprrkshas left
Zash
Yeah, it's from before anyone knew about needing to register these things.
debaclehas left
Zash
I feel like I've seen mention of it somewhere as a thing that was used without being registered, hysterical raisins etc.
Kevhas joined
moparisthebest
> To date, the XML
> namespaces defined within the Jabber/XMPP community have used names
> of the form "jabber:*" (deprecated since early 2002)
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4854.html