XMPP Service Operators - 2026-06-03


  1. gt

    Got it

  2. erebion

    The only place where insecure connections should be fine (apart from dev setups on a local network) is amateur radio, as those links cannot be encrypted.

  3. Holger

    Makes it sound as if "secure" vs. "insecure" connections was a binary distinction.

  4. Holger

    For closed silos, it's often relatively easy to enforce the most 'secure' parameters for connections, authentication mechanisms and whatever, and to declare anything but the most restrictive setups "insecure". In open, federated ecosystems, there will always be compatibility trade-offs to make.

  5. Holger

    For closed silos, it's often relatively easy to enforce the most 'secure' parameters for connections, authentication mechanisms and whatever, and to declare anything but the most restrictive setups "insecure". In open, federated ecosystems, there will always be interop trade-offs to make.

  6. icebound.dev

    Is the xmpp.earth admin here? I have an xmpp.earth user complaining they are unable to message a 07f.de user, due to s2s connection failure

  7. icebound.dev

    > The only place where insecure connections should be fine (apart from dev setups on a local network) is amateur radio, as those links cannot be encrypted. well they can, but not legally :)

  8. erebion

    >> The only place where insecure connections should be fine (apart from dev setups on a local network) is amateur radio, as those links cannot be encrypted. > well they can, but not legally :) It's even more nuanced than that, there are indtances were it'd be fine to encrypt. Not sure whether Ofcom makes any exceptions, though. I do hold a UK licence, but never looked into that particular subject as I have no reason I"d want to do it.