XMPP Service Operators - 2025-12-07

  1. taba

    how do i send a message over xmpp via cli

  2. taba

    preferably omemo-encrypted

  3. icebound.dev

    > how do i send a message over xmpp via cli theres sendxmpp ↺

  4. icebound.dev

    but I dont think it supports OMEMO

  5. Kris

    Libervia-cli maybe?

  6. taba

    > Libervia-cli maybe? https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/User:MDosch/Sendxmpp_incarnations does it support SRV records ↺

  7. taba

    i've used some client without it, it's cringe

  8. Kris

    Probably? Dunno.

  9. icebound.dev

    isnt the SRV records a requirement? I know xmpps is a extension

  10. Menel

    sendxmpp incarnations support it

  11. Menel

    I guess all od them, didn't test all of them ✎

  12. Menel

    I guess all of them, didn't test all of them ✏

  13. Menel

    profanity supports omemo too. Dunno if It can be invoked in scripts non interactively

  14. MattJ

    The original (?) Perl sendxmpp didn't support SRV that I recall, but that was almost 2 years ago and I hope it has either improved or been replaced by now 🙂

  15. jonas’

    if an xmpp client-ish thing did not support 2 SRV records, their usage specified in RFC 3920 from 2004, I have little hope for that software supporting them today, honestly :) ✎

  16. jonas’

    if an xmpp client-ish thing did not support SRV records two years ago, their usage specified in RFC 3920 from 2004, I have little hope for that software supporting them today, honestly :) ✏

  17. jonas’

    if an xmpp client-ish thing did not support SRV records two years ago, the usage of which was specified in RFC 3920 from 2004, I have little hope for that software supporting them today, honestly :) ✏

  18. MattJ

    Haha, 20 years ago

  19. jonas’

    oh! hah.

  20. jonas’

    well, 20 years ago it was more acceptable I suppose.

  21. Link Mauve

    A lot of clients only started taking SRV seriously the day Google Chat came out, requiring proper SRV support for their load balancing.

  22. icebound.dev

    > A lot of clients only started taking SRV seriously the day Google Chat came out, requiring proper SRV support for their load balancing. compliance didn't matter till then? shame ↺

  23. MattJ

    Compliance alone rarely ends up mattering, when you're a open-source maintainer in your limited free time, which is how the majority of projects are run

  24. MattJ

    SRV records didn't really exist in the original (pre RFC) protocol (actually there was briefly a _jabber one somewhere), and when they were added to the RFC I can imagine many projects didn't jump to add them because no servers required them, and servers didn't use them because clients didn't support them. A popular service requiring them and not caring about existing clients/servers broke that stalemate.

  25. MattJ

    Specifications tend to provide the directions when a project comes to implement a feature, but the specifications can't force anyone to implement anything they don't have the time/resources/motivation to implement (unfortunately)