sonny, here is the stacktrace https://paste.rs/adf
Alexhas left
mikeyehas left
mikeyehas joined
Alexhas joined
machas left
Kevhas left
florettahas left
jubalhhas left
goffihas joined
Kevhas joined
belonghas left
sonny
Ha it's a stream error, the server is closing the connection, not xmpp.js
sonny
Apparently because the server is waiting on xmpp.js and it's not doing what it expects
sonny
Can you reproduce with passing --unhandled-rejections=strict to node?
sonny
Also what server is that?
oibaloshas joined
Daniel
sonny, ok. nevermind then. but thanks for your help
i got tasked to code this by someone else who needed this. but they don’t know anything about xmpp but it also had to be node because node is all they use
Daniel
i originally just tried to point them to a 'good' javascript library. and then this grew into more and more me hacking something i don’t understand :-/
Daniel
so i'm not seeing this error. only they do. and apperantly they are seeing this only when thy try this from a server on the other side of world
Daniel
so i thought i'd just increase the client side timeout and be done with it
Daniel
but now that it turns out to be something more weird i'm just gonna give up
sonny
Alright, please invite them to create an issue in the repository
marmistrzhas left
marmistrzhas joined
belonghas joined
marmistrzhas left
mikeyehas left
debaclehas joined
marmistrzhas joined
fade123has left
fade123has joined
FireFlyhas left
FireFlyhas joined
alacerhas left
debaclehas left
pasdesushihas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
pulkomandyhas left
pulkomandyhas joined
marmistrzhas left
alacerhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
belonghas left
kikuchiyohas joined
mikeyehas joined
belonghas joined
pasdesushihas left
pasdesushihas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
lovetoxhas left
pasdesushihas left
mikeyehas left
lovetoxhas joined
pasdesushihas joined
marmistrzhas joined
florettahas joined
pasdesushihas left
fade123has left
fade123has joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
marmistrzhas left
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
belonghas left
tiaodhas left
belonghas joined
tiaodhas joined
machas joined
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
Meta Bergmanhas joined
belonghas left
machas left
jubalhhas joined
jubalhhas left
Stefanhas left
cyrilhas joined
Stefanhas joined
cyril
Hello, I am trying to use the slixmpp python library synchronously
cyril
Like
connect()
do_some_stuff()
close()
cyril
is there some examples using it like this ?
Zash
I've no recent experience with slixmpp but I'd try prefixing every line with `await` and see what happens. :)
cyril
Oh I was talking about sleekxmpp sorry
Stefanhas left
cyril
The thing is that the code using the library is not aware of coroutines
Sam Whited
sleekxmpp is unmaintained and deprecated, if you're starting a new project in python I'd use slixmpp or aioxmpp
cyril
Ok, I was talking of slixmpp, sorry 😅
cyril
The interface exposed to client have to look like somehing synchronous
Sam Whited
Maybe just take the echobot example from the docs and remove the message processing and do whatever you want to do in session_start instead?
cyril
with the event loop running in a thread
cyril
It kind of work but outputs some errors when disconnecting, like "ERROR Task was destroyed but it is pending!"
cyril
I was thinking maybe someone has already done this
Ok thanks, might be the self.disconnect(wait=True) thing!
moparisthebest
It stopped working for me years ago and instead of wasting more time with python I just rewrote it in Rust, might help you as an example though
flow
speaking of, what is the go to rust xmpp library?
belonghas joined
jonas’
Link Mauve, ^
Sam Whited
flow: https://crates.io/crates/tokio-xmpp
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
flow
thanks
Wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas joined
pasdesushihas joined
pasdesushihas left
pasdesushihas joined
pasdesushihas left
cyril
mathieui: Here is a minimal example of what I am trying to do https://pastebin.com/0VTQ7qtg
cyril
If you have any insight
cyril
That was for some quick unit tests, learning rust would be a bit overkill but it is on the todo list!
serge90has left
serge90has joined
pasdesushihas joined
edhelashas left
edhelashas joined
Martinhas left
Martinhas joined
pasdesushihas left
kikuchiyohas left
kikuchiyohas joined
mathieui
cyril, I don’t have a lot of insight around using threads with asyncio, I know there are some barriers in place to prevent people from doing weird things
mathieui
you should keep all slixmpp interactions in the same threads otherwise things can get weird pretty fast
cyril
ok thanks
mathieui
but what you sent seems mostly correct, using process(forever=False) will run the event loop until the client gets disconnected
mathieui
we might get rid of it at some point as it is confusing for people coming from slixmpp
cyril
actually it tells me « ValueError: loop argument must agree with Future » when calling process(forever=False)
cyril
with the non minimal example it worked (with almost the same code…) but I got an error on disconnect
mathieui
cyril, it looks like a future was created on another thread, which then used a different event loop
jubalhhas joined
mathieui
(slixmpp tries to use one specific event loop and only one, but it will not help if things happen in a multithreaded environment)
tiaodhas left
cyril
yep, I will try again with everything in the same thread
cyril
that was the plan anyway
southerntofu
hey is this a good place to submit criticism of MIX spec? or should i wrote a mail/blogpost?
mathieui
FYI you can have something like
def func(self):
xmpp = ClientXMPP(…)
xmpp.connect()
xmpp.loop.run_until_complete(xmpp.wait_until('session_start'))
do_stuff() # you need to run the loop for most network operations though
loop.run_until_complete(xmpp.disconnect())
but it is not a very pleasant workflow
mathieui
southerntofu, I guess an email to standards@ might be a more persistent venue for this?
southerntofu
thanks, makes sense
tiaodhas joined
belonghas left
mathieui
I should finish the slixmpp implementation too, it is already working but lacks mix-admin or mix-misc
oibaloshas left
oibaloshas joined
southerntofu
hmmm i see no intent (yet) to support in dino, gajim, conversations according to bugtracker
southerntofu
is it because people are so happy with MUC? or because there's no momentum yet?
southerntofu
i'm asking because there's some privacy concerns i'd like to address with some MUCs (eg. occupant ID) and i was told MIX was probably the way to go for feedback on specs, instead of fixing/extending existing MUC XEPs
pep.
honestly if you're waiting for MIX to fix this you're gonna wait for some more time
pep.
There's two camps, choose yours :x
Sam Whited
I don't have any good reason, but I suspect it's a mix of MUC working "good enough" once the implementation is done (even though it's a mess under the hood), so there's no user pressure ot move, and MIX ending up being really complicated and requiring a lot of big dependencies (pubsub/pep).
southerntofu
pep., are you saying some people are not convinced by MIX and likely won't be?
pep.
southerntofu, that
Sam Whited
So you've got the double whammy of no user pressure and devs don't want to read 46 pages and implement a ton of new things.
southerntofu
well that makes sense Sam Whited
Sam Whited
That being said, there is slow uptake. There are experimental implementations in a couple of servers and clients, at least.
southerntofu
Sam Whited, where can i see what clients/servers implement it?
southerntofu
my 4 clients of choice apparently don't :P
moparisthebest
southerntofu: it's just tigase
mathieui
southerntofu, siskin is one
Zash
ITYM if you want MIX you should implement MIX
southerntofu
Zash, not sure i *want* mix, though building upon standardized building blocks for multi user chatting sounds appealing :)
Sam Whited
I think there were experimental implementations in ejabberd, prosody, and tigase (those devs will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong) and the tigase people had an implementation in their clients I think. Unsure if it's released or just on a branch somewhere though.
mathieui
But yes, there is MUC which has worked well enough for years despite all of its warts, which we can mostly work around by now, and MIX which requires both pubsub support, multiple (albeit quite short) specs, and home server support
pep.
And also has different trade-offs really
southerntofu
pep., what's the tradeoffs of MIX?
pep.
Not saying I'm against MIX or pro-MUC, but they're not equivalent
mathieui
pep., well, it is more modular and extensible, and the workflows aer nicer from a client dev perspective
mathieui
the main downside is the requirement of home server support
southerntofu
and do you folks know if there's some people working on client/server test suite for MIX? soundsl ike it could help imlpmenetaiton
Zash
We could make it *drumroll* presence-based, like MUC, then you don't need home server support
mathieui
Zash, please no
Zash
IIRC there was brief discussion on some summit about that
southerntofu
mathieui, what do you mean home server? my understanding is if your server doesn't support it a MIX node can provide a MUC compatibility layer, correct?
mathieui
southerntofu, it can be done, yes, but then from a client perspective you are not using MIX
mathieui
presence-based is my main peeve with 0045
southerntofu
yeah i also dislike the whole "presence" concept (to me it's an antifeature though i understand in corporate settings i can be useful)
southerntofu
presence-based chat sounds like IRC to me :)
Zash
what
mathieui
southerntofu, presence is a potential privacy leak but also useful information
mathieui
and MIX does not remove presence, it just removes it from the workflow and makes its support optional
southerntofu
mathieui, i don't have a use case for it, but i'm not opposed to people broadcasting presence info.. but in my view opt-in is better :)
Zash
I can see how it was more useful back when you were online via dialup ~1h per day, but I don't see it as an anti-feature.
Kev
The presence of presence isn’t an anti-feature, in my view, but tying MUC’s workings to it is.
Sam Whited
⤴️
mathieui
^
Wojtekhas left
Zash
This
Kev
(Not because I don’t want presence in my rooms, I do, I just want it decoupled)
southerntofu
Zash, depends on the usecase, but it's a huge metadata leak (see discussion in #modernxmpp). i understand myhome server needs to know which clients are online to deliver messages, but i don't want anyone else to know about that, or whether i received a message or not
Sam Whited
It's a metadata leak that won't matter for 99% of people though.
southerntofu
but i can also understand people who want it
Zash
southerntofu: Presence should definitely be protected, and XMPP tries to do that.
Sam Whited
If you are that tiny percentage of people who need the absolute privacy you described, you need to be using a special service and clients and what not that are designed for that.
Zash
Why you need to add people and get their approval to see their presence
southerntofu
Zash, yes that's good, but that a MUC operator can see everyone's presence is a huge difference in the threat model (i.e. correlating identities) compared to simply subscription settings (at least when the convos are OMEMO-encrypted)
Zash
Yup. What Kev said.
southerntofu
Sam Whited, i don't understand your point.. should privacy just be for the 1%? i'm aware of the tradeoffs i make but most people are not..
moparisthebest
define "privacy"
Sam Whited
southerntofu: no, but we don't need to optimize for the tiny percent of people who are worried about the threat you outlined. Most people it's perfectly fine if they join a MUC and share their presence.
Sam Whited
We do a pretty good job of balancing that overall. Getting rid of all presence won't help the majority of people in any way, it will just annoy them.
Kev
I think it’s good to define protocols that can be used in a reasonably private manner.
mathieui
southerntofu, I don’t see a thread model that has critical protection requirements on presence data (although sure, protecting it as much as we can should be a goal)
Kev
Which MIX tries to do by allowing you to send or not send presence, but still participate in the chat, and it can be controlled on your server, so the room only needs to know when you send a message, or initially join.
Kev
Compared to MUC, where the MUC needs to know not only when you’re online, but how many (and which, practically) devices you have online at that moment.
mathieui
Kev, with MIX, a client only needs to not send presence to the MIX items in their roster, right?
Kev
OTOH, I think Sam is right that 99% (or some high proportion of people) would choose to have the benefits of sharing presence with the room of their friends or whatever, over the privacy.
Kev
mathieui: Yes, the client can just not set up presence and everything Should Just Work.
southerntofu
Kev, yes i think that's a huge improvement, however what started this discussion was in XEP 0403:
southerntofu
> A MIX channel MAY require that all participants publish presence, so that active channel participants are visible. It is not possible to enforce this in the server, so participants in a channel with this option MUST publish presence.
Kev
Practically, the important bit there for privacy is ‘It is not possible to enforce this’ :)
southerntofu
moparisthebest, defining "privacy" is a hard task.. there's different threat models, but i believe they should be more explicit in the specs :)
Sam Whited
To repeat my argument from there: if you need that level of privacy, you can't rely on the server to enforce it anyways, so if you're writing a privacy aware client you'll need to show the user the room policy and not join the room if it requires presence.
southerntofu
Kev, well i'm ok with a server mandating its rules, but why would the spec say my client MUST send my data??
Kev
southerntofu: We have the Security Considerations for that - but they’re only as good as the authors think of, and reviewers comment on.
Kev
southerntofu: Yes, there’s room for improving that wording.
Sam Whited
The client only MUST send the data if the room requires it. If the room doesn't require it (probably most rooms), you don't have to send the data. That's a pretty good privacy tradeoff.
southerntofu
Kev, wouldn't it be useful to have a dedicated mailing list / MUC to discuss privacy/security across the ecosystem and evaluate upcoming specs?
mathieui
southerntofu, that’s supposed to be part of the global process
Sam Whited
Yah, probably best to have them in public, no need for more low-traffic lists.
Kev
It would be useful to have people reviewing privacy/security. That’s not quite the same thing :)
mathieui
Kev, while you’re there, I’m unsure about the resource examples from mix participant jids in 0405
southerntofu
Kev, well i'm no expert at all, but i'm always happy to take some time to give a critical overview from an outsider's perspective (i don't have background on why all the technical decisions have been made)
Kev
The upcoming specs all get sent out on the standards list where people can review and make such comments. Realistically the number of people reviewing upcoming specs is relatively low.
marmistrzhas joined
mathieui
are they supposed to mean something or to be public?
moparisthebest
southerntofu, yea "impossible to define" because it means different things for different people is pretty much my point, I'm in private MUCs with my family hosted on the server in my closet, so presence is not a privacy problem at all (there)
moparisthebest
specs do have security concerns which is generally where privacy related stuff lives too I guess ?
Kev
mathieui - can you give a bit of text for me to search on, or section number please?
mathieui
Kev, e.g. https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0405.html#usecase-user-presence-receive
Kev
The UUID-a1j/7533 bit?
mathieui
yes
mathieui
is it the resource of the client on the other side?
mathieui
and do we want to do resource leak in JID hidden channels?
southerntofu
moparisthebest, that makes sense though i'm not the best person for formal processes :P
Kev
This is the client’s resource, and it’s a long debate. We need unpredictable resources for a bunch of reasons. But at the Summit where we discussed this some people claimed that (despite XMPP already explicitly not guaranteeing your resource is the one you asked for) it was vital that they got the resource they asked for. So a two-part JID where the first half was server-provided, and the second half was client-provided was invented. It’s unrelated to MIX, it’s just the style that was used for those examples.
southerntofu
so anyway thanks for all these answers i'll further read the spec and try to come up with a patch, maybe write for the "security considerations"
Sam Whited
I still *really* hate that. The only argument that I remember was that it was needed for logging, in which case it seems like your logging system should just be better and not force server changes that you can't guarantee anyways.
Sam Whited
Requiring a weird two-part JID just feels like solving the problem from the wrong end and asking for trouble when people inevitably start assuming that's always the format and splitting on the / or whatever. Then again, maybe there were other better reasons I'm forgetting.
Kev
I *do* think we want clients to be able to be uniquely identified by their own server, FWIW.
Kev
But that’s not the same as saying it should be encoded in the resource.
moparisthebest
that's the thing that's optimizing for making it easier for human admins to scan XML streams and logs without server modifications right?
moparisthebest
always seemed beyond silly to me also
tiaodhas left
Zash
There's a disagreement on whether resources identify clients (ie are stable for the long term) or sessions (short lived).
mathieui
Ok, thanks.
belonghas joined
mathieui
I’ll pretend that this is an opaque identifier
Sam Whitedremembers the horrors of HipChat encoding stuff in the resourcepart that the client and server both had to be able to parse
Sam Whited
(not that that's what was happening with this split JID thing IIRC, but letting the client think it can guarantee anything being set is just too close for comfort)
Zashcontinues to ignore all the /Conversations.XXXX resources everywhere
Zashremembers Dino being upset if given a different resource than asked for (fixed now tho)
Sam Whitedjust ignores anything the client requests and gives them a random resource.
Kev
I think what people encode in resources is up to them in a closed system (or if they’re a server in an open system, for that matter).
Kev
I know GTalk used to encode cluster routing information into the resources, and that seemed fine (smart, even) to me.
Kev
Wouldn’t work so well these days in the increasingly post-resource world, but back then it made sense.
Sam Whited
Oh yah, HipChat did that too and that part was nice, it was the bits the client had to understand that made it a problem, made upgrades difficult, broke them if the server didn't have it for some reason, etc.
Sam Whited
But yah, server sets the resource so if it wants to sneak some information in there it probably can't hurt anything.
Sam Whited
(assuming it does like I said and doesn't accept the resource from the client, which could lead to issues if a malicious client tries to sneak stuff in)
raghavgururajanhas left
Yagizаhas left
debaclehas joined
pasdesushihas joined
flow
> A MIX channel MAY require that all participants publish presence
how does a client discover this requirement? and how does a server know that a client complies?
Meta Bergmanhas left
flow
mathieui> and do we want to do resource leak in JID hidden channels?
there is a resource like in MIX hidden channels? could you point me to it?
mathieui
flow, I was pointing out that MIX-Presence supposed that you keep the resource even in the "anonymized" JID you get from the service
These JIDs will be used to represent specific JID clients. The resource associated with the encoded JID can be either of the follipwing two options:
The resource value from the associated client JID; or
A mapped valued to an anonymized value. This approach MUST be used with MIX-ANON.
mathieui
not a fan of the encoded JID thing, to be honest, but I can see how that is something you may want for plugging it into existing presence-handling code
Sam Whited
Oh crap, when I thought that I didn't want to re-read thsi earlier and was complaining about the length I forgot there are actually 7 other XEPs some of which I'd need to also read in order to understand this. Yah, maybe I won't get to that this weekend.
Sam Whited
I guess technically it works with just core, so I'm going to pretend I didn't see that and try not to despair.
Zash
So summary XEP the broken down series is too long by itself?
flow
to be fair, I believe groupchat protocols are simply not short
flow
mathieui, which "encoded JID thing" exactly?
Sam Whited
Yah, it's true, it is a *big* thing no matter how you slice it, but that doesn't make me feel better about the work I'd have to do to support it :)
flow
hmm, if you have a decent PubSub/PEP support than creating a minimal MIX client implementation should be "easy". OTOH I did not do it yet in Smack, so I could be proven wrong.✎
flow
hmm, if you have a decent PubSub/PEP support then creating a minimal MIX client implementation should be "easy". OTOH I did not do it yet in Smack, so I could be proven wrong. ✏
mathieui
flow, user JIDs are "<opaque id>#room@service"
mathieui
see any example in mix-presence https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0403.html#usecase-presence-leave
flow
mathieui, yeah right, you need to stuff the four-tule of (MIX service, room name, room-user id, and room-user session id) into a JID, which has at most three parts
flow
I would have design it similar, so I don't see the issue with it
flow
(I was considering adding the room-user id into the resource, but it appears all the same in the end)
flow
*four-tuple
Sam Whited
Guess I'll have to read pubsub (20 pages) and its smaller and simpler cousine because pubsub was too complex, pep (25 pages) as well. (not that I think mix would have been better of without using existing building blocks, I just don't think it's feasable for me to actually implement all of this any time soon)
raghavgururajanhas joined
Zash
20 pages?
flow
Sam Whited, you have to look at it this way: MIX motivates you to implement PubSub, then PEP, and with that you have the building block for another dozens XEPs like bookmarks, avatars, …
Sam Whited
ish. I know it's not a great measurement, half of that is probably just version and appendices
Zash
How are you measuring?
Sam Whited
printed to PDF
Zash
Did you forget a zero?
flow
he didn't specify the paper format
flow
for all we know, it could be A2
Zash
The PDF version of 0060 is 182 pages, PEP is 19
Zash
or is this about one of the MIX XEPs?
Sam Whited
huh, that would make more sense, let's see what this did weird
flow
While cool kids have posters of their favorite swedish speed-death metal band on their wall, flow likes to look at walls full of specifications to read
Sam Whited
PEP is 20 for me (I was looking at the wrong one) but XEP-0060 appears to have printed (in that the first/last pages are correct), and it's also roughly 20, weird
Sam Whited
I did think it would be a lot longer thoug, so that's weird
Zash
Surely you mean 20 *stacks* of paper?
edhelas
still shorter than LOTR
Zash
We should resume the cut&paste we started in ... like 2014?
flow
Zash, IIRC it was 2015
Sam Whited
oh yah, there it goes, now it's 223 pages. No idea what happened last time or how it left pages out of the middle.
jubalhhas left
flow
The main problem you want to avoid with large specs like PubSub and MIX is unclarity about the required and optional parts. Ideally a XEP tells you early about the required parts and extension points for optional features, so that a developer can stop reading after them when starting an implementation. I think PubSub fails to do so.
Sam Whited
Yah, I tend to agree
Sam Whited
I was having a discussion with someone earlier who was saying they hoped the last holdouts from XMPP would switch over to working on / using Matrix, and while I pushed back against that for all the usual reasons, one of the things someone else said was that the Matrix specs were just a lot clearer and easier to build on top of even if you already started with a basic protocol implementation and were just developing features. I don't know if they had pubsub in mind when they said that, but I do suspec they're not wrong when I look at things like this.
Sam Whited
I don't really know how to improve that situation though, unfortunately.
Kev
Matrix is a chat system though, isn’t it?
Zash
It's a distributed JSON graph database.
Sam Whited
It's a protocol that's used for a lot of things in the same way XMPP is.
Sam Whited
But mostly for a chat system.
Zash
It does get further with "simple clients, complex servers" than current XMPP does, I'll give them that.
Sam Whited
Amusingly, this discussion took place over IRC.
Sam Whited
(for me, I assume they were on Matrix)
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
fade123has left
jubalhhas joined
flow
I find the Matrix specifications on https://matrix.org/docs/spec/ heavily API centric, I am missing a description of their basic principles
mathieui
flow, that was also my conclusion a few years ago, this is an API documentation at most (maybe that got better even if it is not what you would like, I don’t know)
flow
I just skimmed over it, it appears to be a bit better now
Zash
JSON Web API all the things.
flow
eventually I always wondered if that "distributed graph" thing matrix does could also be done on top of XMPP, I see no reason why not
Zash
Sure you can
raghavgururajanhas left
flow
that would allow you to exploit an existing federated network, but HTTP and JSON where probably to tempting to use
Sam Whited
Sure, but if we write another 200 page spec to do it and mock them for using json instead of getting our own house in order it's probably not going to be very helpful.
flow
mocking them for using json is not helpful, right
flow
but writing and implementing a spec similar to matrix's distributed graph thingy should be fine
Zash
flow: you thinking MAM replication instead of routing, or something?
flow
right, but then again, I am fine with centralized room management
flow
not sure if we need to have something that provides eventual consistency
raghavgururajanhas joined
flow
there are surely distributed systems where you want to have eventual consistency, but can't think of a reason why federated groupchats should be based on such a system
flow
if you want availability, use an server implementation that supports clustering
flow
I'd love to hear the take on a Matrix person on that
mathieui
flow, I don’t really have much insight over how matrix works, I assume the replication & eventual consistency allow a more "resilient" view over rooms, without additional requirements for the server "hosting" the room for real
Zash
they usually compare it to git
mathieui
You can probably interact with the people on your own server who are also in that room, and that counts as delayed writes when the "real" room gets back online
mathieui
I mean, that is an interesting property to have, against outages, censorship, etc
mathieui
(I am only speculating obviously, I don’t know if that is even possible, as reconciliation between all of that state must be a real pain in the neck)
flow
mathieui, use a high-availability cluster to reduce outages, planed maintainance is usually not an issue, not sure how it helps against censorship
Zash
flow: you can remove a server and the room lives on on other servers
mathieui
flow, in the event of a server being bleeped out of existence by a powerful actor, instead of a whole lot of nothing, you have split communities across the ecosystem
flow
also, what incentivies servers to keep state of rooms the don't "own"
Zash
flow: now that's a question
Zash
and how do you enforce moderation, bans etc?
flow
potentially someone will answer, "no server owns a room", but the question still applies
mathieui
flow, well for matrix, "because that’s the protocol", but otherwise, I don’t know
southerntofu
flow, my understanding of the matrix model is censorship-resilience.. if my server with high availability gets seized/disconnected/attacked other people can continue chatting as if nothing happened.. it's not in my threat model, but i understand the value of it eg. for a wikileaks chan :)
Zash
blockchain? probably blockchain.
southerntofu
(ah people just said the same sorry i was reading backlog)
flow
southerntofu, sure that is a very nice property in theory. but doesn't that somehow imply that all servers need to keep all the state for eternity?
mathieui
(and if that is a desired property, then you need to put it in the base protocol to have the incentive "this must work")
flow
notsurehowthiscouldscale
Zash
I tried reading the s2s spec once and it gave me a headache. Quite the opposite of XMPP s2s where you just open a stream and send stuff.
southerntofu
flow, not necessary for all eternity, but sure that's the main problem with matrix servers lol
Danielhas left
mathieui
I don’t want to try to read the specs again, but I imagine you must have the latest state to be able to send writes to the upstream server
southerntofu
i mean i understand why you would support this use case in some circumstances, but making it the default takes hardware requirements through the roof
mathieui
which require you to effectively maintain the state internally
flow
mathieui, I don't think this is true
flow
if it is a dag, then you just need to have some dag node
flow
and eventually someone will reconcile
flow
but you should be able to write without having the latest state, I mean that is the core of eventual consistency
southerntofu
flow, though another interesting property is because so many beefy servers store the state, you can host your server on a very unstable uplink that often gets disconnected from the internet, without resulting in eg. netsplits alla IRC :)
mathieui
I don’t know how the state is managed and what is accepted and what isn’t so I will not try to extrapolate further
flow
southerntofu, that's actually a very good point
flow
XMPP links are very fragile if the reciving end is on a low-bandwith connection✎
flow
XMPP links are very fragile if the receiving end is on a low-bandwith connection ✏
flow
IMHO one of XMPPs biggest weakness
flow
OTOH, MIX/MAM mitigates this (a bit)
southerntofu
flow, yes that's why FMUC was so interesting, though i still have to finish reading MIX spec because they said there was something equivalent :)
Zash
Still tricky with s2s outages
flow
Zash, right
flow
I think if I where to do XMPP again, I would base it on pulling, not pushing
flow
because with pulling, the receiver can determine the rate
etadrops https://theta.eu.org/2019/10/10/nea-federation-design.html in here
jubalhhas left
southerntofu
flow, doesn't PubSub support pull modes?
flow
southerntofu, sure it does
flow
but I was talking about pulling a first-class principle
Zash
This reminds me, has anyone looked at MLS? I read the architecture doc and it talked about requiring guaranteed eventual delivery.
flow
e.g. sending a message is just putting the message into your server's archive, the server informs the recipient about the new message. once the recipients server has pulled the message, the "pending messages" flag is cleared
southerntofu
flow, isn't that what happens already when an s2s message can't be delivered?
southerntofu
isn't there like MAM for s2s? :P
Zash
southerntofu: there is not
southerntofu
oooh, my bad for assuming otherwise :)
flow
southerntofu, not exactly, and even if, not potentially
southerntofu
sounds like it could be useful
Zash
MAM for s2s would pretty much be the "matrix over xmpp" flow mentioned earlier
southerntofu
well matrix over XMPP would be that + guaranteeing eventual consistency between several nodes who all act as authority for a resources (which is way more comlpex)
flow
Isn't "MAM for s2s" a little bit to vague? Hmm, but yes, if it is vague, then it could be pretty much everything ;)
Zash
flow: You could also figure out s2s+198 with resumption.
Zash
Not graph stuff tho
flow
Zash, sure, but what I have in mind is much more radical
Zash
flow: wanna write a xep about `<previous id="mam id of previous message"/>` and how to use that to magic together archives?
southerntofu
eta, i love your article (not finished reading just yet), the "sponsoring servers" is precisely what MX/NS secondary servers are about :P
flow
Zash, once I get a better grasp about where this is exaclty going, why not. :)
flow
uh, and I would need to fall into a pot of gold first, so that I can take the required time to do so :)
Zash
flow: Lets you detect holes in archives at least, if you receive a message with a pointer to a previous message you don't have. Throw some graph theory at it and call it Matrix over XMPP.
flow
hmm, having an extension that points to the preceeding message in <{mam:2}result/> actually does not sound like a bad idea
flow
we don't we have that already?
southerntofu
eta, https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0289.html sounds a lot like what you're talking about (federated MUC) :)
Zash
flow: not unless you count rsm, but it's not excatly that
flow
thinking about it <{mam:2}fin/> is probably the better place
Zash
flow: I was thinking about this for live messages
Zash
For patching up after s2s outages
Zash
Remember how MIX and s2s outages is an unsolved problem :)
eta
southerntofu: indeed!
eta
shame nothing implements it though
Zash
eta: you don't happen to have markdown sources for that blog somewhere? I like to convert to .epub for reading and source files tend to be less messy than converting from html.
Zash: Undocumented solution, but I’m sure I discussed how to address it at the summit last year or the year before. Indeed, just by signalling there’s a hole.
southerntofu
eta, it doesn't look over complicated to implement.. also i need to finished reading MIX spec but it looks like there's some stuff about that in there too :)
fade123has joined
pasdesushihas left
oibaloshas left
oibaloshas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
lovetox_has joined
etahas left
etahas joined
etahas left
jubalhhas joined
etahas joined
asterixhas left
asterixhas joined
marmistrzhas left
goffihas left
goffihas joined
marmistrzhas joined
jubalhhas left
stpeterhas joined
kikuchiyohas left
mikeyehas joined
Ge0rGhas left
marmistrzhas left
Ge0rGhas joined
Ge0rGhas left
Ge0rGhas joined
raghavgururajanhas left
jubalhhas joined
jubalhhas left
oibaloshas left
oibaloshas joined
friendlyOtterhas joined
friendlyOtter
On xmpp.org they mention stroke as client library. A quick look around in the java world and i found camel-quarkus-xmpp. Any advice/remarks on that one?
Sam Whited
I haven't used it, but that looks like it's just a simple thing to get XMPP messages into/out of their integration framework, not a full XMPP library?
Sam Whited
There's also babbler if you're just looking for something in Java: https://bitbucket.org/sco0ter/babbler/src