XSF Discussion - 2017-12-15

Ge0rG, can you point me to a thread for PARS? (on standards?)

It's in the June 2016 archive I think, will look up from PC later

LMSTFY

pep., https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2016-June/031150.html https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-April/032599.html https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-May/032616.html (if you get a chance, Ge0rG, please confirm that this is the thread you meant to link)

(those are three links, but it’s the same thread, mailman archive is stupid)

jonasw: thanks, those are exactly the right links

Ge0rG, yw

There was some guy who proposed a protocol to access SMS via XMPP from multiple clients. What happend with this protocol/idea?

marc: are you talking about https://jmp.chat/ or moparisthebest' self-echo component?

https://github.com/moparisthebest/xmpp-echo-self

Ge0rG, probably the self-echo stuff

GitHub not reachable... fuck ... :D

Allow me to point and laugh

Ge0rG, do we need to return the TOKEN (ad-hoc command)?

Could be used as manual fallback but apart from that I don't know a good reason to return it

marc: we MUST return an xmpp: URI and we MAY return a web URI

Ge0rG, yes, I know but this wasn't the question :P

marc: my answer was supposed to be comprehensive, so we should not return anything beyond that

marc: one could think about adding a description text, token validity info, onboarding information etc.; but I think a minimal protocol is beneficial

Ge0rG, well I already have defined a token expiration field :)

marc: I think that URI and URL are not the right names, BTW.

Ge0rG, I'm open for suggestions :)

marc: I'd go with `uri` for the xmpp: link, but something like `landingpage` or `web` for the https

yeah, but it should contain 'url' I think

something like landing_url

maybe...

please no underscores in XML

marc: after thinking about it, it's okay to return the validity to the inviter. Their client could create an i18ned message to share, like "Hi, I would like to invite you to chat with me under <https://...>. This link will expire in 2 weeks."

marc: http://ajaxian.com/archives/uri-vs-url-whats-the-difference

Ge0rG, I'm glad to hear this ;)

Ge0rG, I know the difference between URI and URL

Ge0rG, What's your point? :D

Ge0rG, do you find it ironic that your link has UTF-8 mojibake?

> depending on the client’s capabilities

marc: my point is that by using "uri" and "url" in the response, you imply they are different representations of the same thing, whereas they are different things, more or less.

jonasw: yes. Sorry.

Ge0rG, yes, that's correct so we'll change this. But 'landing_url' or 'invitation_url' are okay in my opinion

marc: "jonasw> please no underscores in XML"

oh, missed that :D

What's the reason?

it’s ugly

we don’t do it in XMPP so far, AFAIK

jonasw: would you be ok with `landing-url`?

(the only exception possibly features for PubSub)

sure

Just for reasons of appearance?

marc, yes :)

Ok, I like this :D

landingUrl

CamelCase

<x xmlns='jabber:x:data' type='result'> <title>Invitation</title> <reported> <field var='uri' label='Invitation link'/> <field var='landing-url' label='Landing Page'/> <field var='expire' label='Expiration Time'/> </reported> <item> <field var='uri'><value>xmpp:georg@yax.im?add;preauth=aG5axoo8iagahS9o;ibr</value></field> <field var='landing-url'><value>https://yax.im/i/#georg@yax.im?add;preauth=aG5axoo8iagahS9o;ibr</value></field> <field var='expire'><value>2017-12-17T02:56:15Z</value></field> </item> </x>

marc: like this?

aaaa

data tables

I’m afraid of data tables

Ge0rG, looks similar to my XEP yes :D

But I don't use reported

I’m afraid (literally) that Ge0rG is right in his use of reported.

I think that's only necessary if you have multiple <item> elements

marc, using a form would be the wrong semantic here.

and I don't have reported support in ejabberd

great

:D

zinid, I know that feel

I've combined an example from ad-hoc with what marc wrote in his XEP.

damn

I was hoping that Ad-Hoc might forbid that

:D

<iq type='result' to='romeo@example.com' from='example.com' id='exec2'> <command xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/commands' sessionid='config:20020923T213616Z-700' node='invite' status='completed'> <x xmlns='jabber:x:data' type='result'> <item> <field var='uri'> <value>xmpp:example.com?register;invite-token=TOKEN</value> </field> <field var='landing-url'> <value>https://example.com/invite/#TOKEN</value> </field> <field var='expire'> <value>2017-11-06T02:56:15Z</value> </field> </item> </x> </command> </iq>

Ignore the XMPP URI...

let me delve into the horros and re-read XEP-0004 on the reported thing

> (the only exception possibly features for PubSub) IIRC we use _ and - inconsistently there \o/

Time to update the XEP then ;)

it isn’t clear to me whether <reported/> is required when type='result' is used

there is no normative language regarding that afaict

btw, xmpp.net: “ It's too busy, try again later. ”

again?

I need to fix that issue which makes some domains break the queue

but I was hoping not having to touch PHP

underscores for the win!

marc: I also hacked it into my conversations fork and have been using it for a month or so, works great

moparisthebest, how do you send SMS? How do you select the recipient?

The hard part has been designing a plugin API but I'm almost done with that too

The local part of the jid

moparisthebest, so you just add a contact to the roster?

marc: I don't really bother with that yet

https://github.com/moparisthebest/Conversations/tree/sms

That's the hacky code, expect conversations pr and separate stand alone plugin in a few days

moparisthebest, hehe nice :)

marc: if you're much of an Android dev I want MMS with attachments to convert to/from http upload too but MMS on Android looks like a nightmare...

s/MMS/anything/

hm, that was unfortunate

s/MMS/anything/;s/anything/MMS/ should fix it

SMS isn't bad, but yes this is all way worse than plain Java

and plain java is already bad ;-)

What did you say!?

moparisthebest, I'm not really an Android dev :D

jonasw: well it's no rust, but at least it's not erlang :)

moparisthebest, what happens if you have two Conversations clients with your plugin? :)

marc: badness

:D

Double sms I'd guess

moparisthebest, actually, I need to look into erlang.

that video is convincing

I like Erlang somehow :)

jonasw, do you have a link for it? I forgot to bookmark it

Erlang http://howfuckedismydatabase.com/nosql/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrIjfIjssLE

there you go

moparisthebest, do you have plans to fix this or support it?

marc: which

moparisthebest, multiple SMS-capable devices

marc: each could pick it's own different echo component and then it'd all work fine

And yes the plugin will support that

moparisthebest, but isn't the idea to allow sending SMS from desktop-clients, for example?

Oh wait marc so all connected xmpp clients can send SMS

Only the one conversations needs the plugin

Others need nothing new or special

That all works today

Sure but what if I have two smartphones

Or two SIM cards?

That when you'd need a seperate echo domain for each

Otherwise you don't know what number to send with

moparisthebest, okay, can you somehow select which echo domain to be used?

Yes

Not in the hacky version with no options

Plugin version will support this

moparisthebest, sounds promising :)

moparisthebest, But selection of the SMS-device will need support in other clients as well, right?

Now I don't have a phone with 2 Sim cards so that will be harder

No

All other clients see is a regular xmpp chat

moparisthebest, how do you decide the SIM card/device? phonenumber@echo-sim1 and phonenumber@echo-sim2 ?

The phone knows anything sent to echo.burtrum.org or whatever goes out via SMS

Hi all - I'm attempting to arrange for a hotel discount for the upcoming Summit and Fosdem in Brussels (February 1st - 4th). To get some kind of headcount, it'd be good if you could sign up on the wiki page if you're planning to be there: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Summit_22

moparisthebest> All other clients see is a regular xmpp chat Why is this message duplicated in my client? Meh.

I constantly receive duplicates

zinid: it should be filtered away by yaxim's deduplicator.

yeah, heuristics

Unfortunately, my client doesn't have a log going back 20mins, and my server doesn't log outgoing c2s stanzas. Meh.

zinid: MUC message (ID) rewriting makes heuristics a required feature.

Ge0rG, I know

Ge0rG, why do you see different peoples messages twice though?

Ok, now this is just getting more and more weird. prosody only delivered that message ID once to my yaxim.

jonasw: it's only a single message from a single person duplicated.

Maybe my MSN just rejoined the MUC, but I should get the message as part of history then.

Okay, there was a 0198 reconnect just in that moment.

Something fishy is going on, and I don't know what it is.

Will increase logcat buffer to 16M now.

jonasw, Ge0rG, thanks for the links! (PARS)

Ge0rG, does yaxim dump XML traffic in logcat?

zinid: if you enable it, yes.

Ge0rG, nice

sounds like an off-by-one in the stream management handling

reminds me of early aioxmpp's reconnect loops when a broken stanza was received. broken stanza -> exception -> disconnect stream -> resume stream management -> receive same broken stanza

jonasw: yeah, well possible. But I know for sure that I've fixed the off-by-ones in yaxim. It was a long and complex process

jonasw: if you close the stream, you are not allowed to resume.

Ge0rG, I’m not sure that the stream was closed cleanly. it’s been a while.

Ge0rG, are you fine with 'invite' and 'create-account' ad-hoc command names?

marc: yeah

what are the semantics of those commands again?

jonasw, invite a user, create an account (optinal with predefined username) :)

create an account we already have an adhoc for that

jonasw: the former will create a PARS link with an "ibr" tag.

latter is for admins or other privileged users

jonasw: do we?

jonasw: the goal is for the admin to define the user name, and then the user can use IBR to specify their password.

Ge0rG, jonasw I tink we had this exact same disucussion a couple of days ago :D

https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0133.html#add-user

Ge0rG, ah okay

ahh, so it’s invite minus PARS

I think the wording was exactly the same :D

jonasw: no, it's a "I define a username and send a link" thing

jonasw: so it's rather PARS-for-accounts

jonasw: and it implies PARS between inviter and invitee

Ge0rG, how is that different from "invite minus PARS"?

no wait

so create-account allows for IBR registration, but also PARS?

what’s the difference to invite then?

invite gives you the possiblity to create an account or just make server-side PARS

account-creation creates an account on the server

and create-account forces account creation?

yes

I see

jonasw, any objections so far? :)

make sure you make that distinction clear in the document and provide use cases which support that distinction

jonasw: create-account is for admins who want to enroll friends. invite is for users of (semi)public servers.

jonasw: a server admin can use invite if they don't want to pre-define the account name

Ge0rG, I don’t see why I wouldn’t use invite as an admin, too?

jonasw: however, there is no guarantee that an invite will lead to account creation

jonasw: if the user already has an account, invite will merely fall-back to PARS

win

why wouldn’t I want that?

jonasw: what?

Sigh. Something just happened, and now my yaxim got reset.

like, all-data-lost-app-reset.

why would I want force people to create an account?

if they already have one?

especially if they still could create an account with 'invite' if they wanted to

create-account seems to have only limitations in my eyes

and I’m failing to see the use-case for that

jonasw, if you want to ensure that set of users is on your server, for example if you don't use E2EE :D

jonasw: it's because marc insists that you want to have all your friends on your server.

I see

I don’t follow that argument, but okay

I don’t care as long as both works and I don’t have to use create-account :)

jonasw: I see create-account as a feature I can use to easily onboard my grand-aunt.

why not use invite for that? ✏

ah, because they have to choose an account name

right

but then again, clients could offer default names based on the screenname, as was discussed earlier here, IIRC

Maybe you have a company or other organization where you have to enforce that all memebers are on a "special" server. For privacy reasons, for example.

marc: good point.

indeed

marc: mention it in the rationale / user-story

yes

Ge0rG, thanks!

the XSF loves corporate rollouts

that’s the kind of example I was looking for :)

Okay, good that we agree on that :) I'm happy now

(even though corporate onboarding will probably work very different)

jonasw, yes, but this depends of how big the "organization" is

s/of/on

normally there would be some kind of single-sign-on in place and the xmppd may not even have privilegues to create an account there. but sure, there may be use-cases.

Ge0rG, don't know why it was duplicated, at the time I only had conversations running so single client even

moparisthebest: looks like it was a yaxim bug, but we'll never find out. Sorry for bothering you.

but people already have accounts (twitter, google), why do you want to register them on your server?

Ge0rG, no bother, conversations has a method for guessing if a message is the same not sure if you can copy it

why we cannot use oauth, like all others do?

zinid, oauth is about authorization, you still need to create an account, right?

marc, right

zinid, what's you point regarding the account creation / user invitation proposal then?

marc, you need no account creation

you can create it on the fly at first login

zinid, you're talking about public servers, right?

marc, I would use it on my private server too, why not?

zinid, okay, I have a private server and want somebody to join it

zinid, what's your protocol flow then?

I'm not talking about invitation

this is a separate subject

Step 1: troll everyone Step 2: ??? Step 3: PROFIT!

Hahaha

Ge0rG, wow, oauth is trolling now?

zinid, but we were talking about invitation

> why would I want force people to create an account? I replied to this ^^^

zinid: with oauth, you can connect to an existing account. but you can't xmpp-connect to a service not offering xmpp

what?

zinid: you could create an xmpp account by logging in with an oauth provider and using that provider as "identity verification"

so what?

zinid: you can't login to twitter with an xmpp client

I can

for user this will be transparent

you choose an xmpp server, provides oauth provider and it's done

zinid: so you will still create an xmpp account?

sure

in an automatic way

the point is that it's pain in ass to keep all accounts with passwords for a user

zinid: so instead of a password, you use an oauth token issued by Faceoogle?

yes

or how it's called, I don't remember details

you can fetch address book and send invites by the way

https://help.aol.com/articles/aim-discontinued RIP.

What a shame

time to replace it with another protocol

there’s nothing to replace

nobody was using it

"Can I still use AIM between now and December 15?", *now* being Dec 11th.

more users than XMPP? :P

But ICQ is still running?

by now I've helped ~15 people to convert to xmpp. And I never even had AIM.. : )

ThurahT: are they all on jabber.org? :D

yeah, I wanted only the best for them

not sure if…

: )

when the news broke that AIM was about to be discontinued, I suggested to set up an XMPP domain which focuses on easy conversion from AIM

nobody had the time though :)

jonasw: such an irony

I had a few who might have needed that. But eventually they caught on setting servers up.

jonasw, don't be sad, that was pointless anyway, everyone is "converted" into whatsapp 🙂