XMPP Council - 2022-06-29

  1. jonas’

    I may be late by a few minutes

  2. daniel

    It's time

  3. jonas’

    (I won't be, though)

  4. daniel

    1) Roll call

  5. jonas’


  6. moparisthebest


  7. daniel

    larma, Ge0rG?

  8. larma

    another meeting at the same time, let's see if I can handle that

  9. daniel

    2) Agenda bashing sorry for not sending one out. there wouldn’t have been any interesting on there ffiw. but let me take the opportunity to point out that if you have anything that should be on the agenda ping me in here or send me a PM and i'll add it

  10. daniel

    3) editors update none this week

  11. jonas’

    yep, editor was sleepy yesterday

  12. daniel

    4) items for voting none

  13. daniel

    5) Pending votes

  14. daniel

    larma, on both new XEPs

  15. daniel

    jonas’ and daniel on Websocket s2s

  16. daniel

    moparisthebest, would you be willing to take Peter up on the offer to guide you through the rfc process?

  17. daniel

    because what Peter said in the email are basically my thoughts from last week as well (should be a new rfc that covers both)

  18. jonas’

    I'm -0 on the websocket s2s thing, because: - it should probably be an RFC - I can't bring myself to vote *for* the concept of websocket s2s.

  19. moparisthebest

    yep! though probably still want them as XEPs in the short term

  20. jonas’

    (but I'll not veto it if "we" want to have this conceptual (insert word) at all and develop it in experimental a bit before it moves on as RFC)

  21. daniel

    I’m -0 on the XEP websocket s2s (should be an rfc)

  22. jonas’

    furthermore, I second Ge0rGs comments on XMPP-over-QUIC

  23. moparisthebest

    yep I'll fix that wording as soon as voting is over

  24. jonas’

    (In particular 52{22,69}/udp)

  25. moparisthebest

    and commence the bikeshedding on the default port >:)

  26. daniel

    (i think this means that larma has to be at least a +1; if he -0 it as well it wont pass, right?)

  27. moparisthebest

    I couldn't disagree more on the default ports changing though, otherwise what's ALPN for ?

  28. jonas’

    no matter the default port, we should get a registration because it makes sense for cases where people don't want to multiplex.

  29. jonas’

    ALPN is to rot in hell?

  30. jonas’


  31. moparisthebest

    ALPN is here, mandatory, and now encrypted, why reveal we are doing XMPP instead of HTTPS? iirc there is a whole RFC and working group commited to making passive survallience harder

  32. moparisthebest

    but, I digress :)

  33. daniel

    ok i’m gonna assume that larma is still on list for those two XEPs; let's move on

  34. daniel

    6) Date of Next

  35. jonas’

    +1w wfm

  36. moparisthebest

    +1w wfm

  37. daniel

    one of my projects is currently going through a rather busy phase so there is a slight chance I won’t make it; but i'll try

  38. daniel

    +1w wfm

  39. daniel

    7) AOB

  40. moparisthebest

    none here

  41. jonas’

    none here

  42. daniel

    8) Close

  43. daniel

    thank you all

  44. moparisthebest

    thanks all !