XSF Discussion - 2019-04-09

  1. Ge0rG

    moparisthebest: SamWhited might know the right people there...

  2. Seve

    jonas’, what kind of changes can move a XEP to Deferred state?

  3. Ge0rG

    Seve: no changes for a year

  4. Seve

    Ge0rG, yes, but can changes in the document move it to Deferred? Just trying to understand the following sentence: "Only substantial, non-editorial changes count as activity (or updates) for the purpose of considering moving a XEP from or to Deferred state." What kind of changes can move a XEP to Deferred?

  5. Ge0rG

    Seve: none

  6. Ge0rG

    Seve: that sounds like an unfortunate wording

  7. Seve

    Ge0rG, thank you, I just wanted to check just in case https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/780/files

  8. Ge0rG

    Seve: ah, it actually does have a meaning: editorial changes don't count when checking whether to move *to* Deferred

  9. Seve

    Ge0rG: may be too early for me then! I'll check it out later, on my bike. Thank you :)

  10. Ge0rG

    Don't read and drive!

  11. mikaela

    > No DoX servers on there yet though :) What is DoX? I thought the X was to denote T/H without typing longly? Oh, DNS over XMPP?

  12. jonas’

    Seve, the point is, editorial changes do *not* count when considering whether to move a XEP to deferred. I.e. if it has received editorial changes (but no substantial, non-editorial changes) over 12 months, it still moves to deferred.

  13. Seve

    jonas’, that way is understandable, but I'm not sure if the problem here is my poor English or the wording. I will try to check it again on the evening today and see, because I'm still so-so with the "from or to", but my poor English has many chances to be the problem here :)

  14. jonas’


  15. jonas’

    I can fix the wording either way

  16. jonas’

    please leave a comment on the PR so that I don’t forget

  17. Kev

    For the little it's worth, the wording seems fine to me.

  18. Kev

    Because there are changes from and to deferred, and the type of updates done affects both.

  19. flow

    But isn't question if the wording is fine for people with less knowledge about how the process works. And obviously it already confused people. If it can be improved so that it is easier to understand, then we should

  20. jonas’

    (and I will)

  21. jonas’

    Kev, I’m still not convinced that the things XEP-0001 says about versioning are sufficient to simply refer to that from the text, because it doesn’t at all mention how editorial changes affect versioning, AFAICT

  22. Kev

    Indeed, isn't that the point? That editorial changes are out of scope of the process. They don't need approval, they don't need 'Updated Versions' (in XEP-0001 speak), they don't trigger moves from Deferred, etc.

  23. flow

    Is it part of the process specification that they don't need approval and stuff?

  24. Kev

    It's part of xep 1 that immaterial changes to Draft don't need approval, yes.

  25. jonas’

    Kev, I think it should still be mentioned

  26. flow

    moparisthebest, https://github.com/igniterealtime/Smack/commit/62fd897cf7c021b845ce7f4e66b5e04348204975

  27. Andrew Nenakhov

    Did anyone try Matrix's Jitsi videoconferences? Do they even work?

  28. Andrew Nenakhov

    Browser is just endlessly loading up Jitsi widget, then shows unpressable button "join conference"

  29. pep.

    Maybe ask in a matrix channel?

  30. Andrew Nenakhov

    It is impolite to ask fanboys if their crap even works )))

  31. Andrew Nenakhov

    Ok, it's definitely broken.

  32. goffi


  33. Seve

    Hey goffi thanks for sharing! Will take a look later

  34. goffi

    they use a mongoseIM and a custom inbox feature (cf. https://mongooseim.readthedocs.io/en/latest/modules/mod_inbox/)

  35. moparisthebest

    flow: very nice!

  36. Neustradamus

    flow: Have you possibility to add SCRAM-SHA-256(-PLUS) in Smack too?

  37. flow

    Neustradamus, yes, but not a priority

  38. Neustradamus

    Because a lot of softwares use Smack and for have a full compatibility with "New generation" servers

  39. Neustradamus

    Tigase, Jackal, Metronome IM already ready.

  40. Neustradamus

    Openfire wait Smack I think ^^

  41. Neustradamus

    Ejabberd had all informations for add support.

  42. flow

    Can anyone tell why service discovery was removed from xep203?

  43. moparisthebest

    https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0203.html#revision-history-v0.3 I guess look up council logs from around 2007-03-28 ?

  44. Zash


  45. Zash


  46. Zash

    > 8. XEP-0203: Delayed Delivery > Issue Last Call? > No objections. Peter to add section on service discovery.

  47. Zash


  48. Zash

    Oh, here https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/council/2007-March/002057.html

  49. Zash

    > Ralph -1 pending removal of service discovery section. Peter to remove and publish version 0.3.

  50. Zash

    So, ask if ralphm remembers what the reasoning was

  51. ralphm

    Let me think.

  52. ralphm

    I'd have to look at the diffs and discussion logs.

  53. Zash

    Doesn't seem to be any logs from 2007 in the current archive tho

  54. ralphm

    Doesn't mean I don't have them.

  55. Zash

    I would guess that it makes sense to just always stamp on delay since the receiver should ignore what they don't understand

  56. ralphm

    Maybe also because it is a format that can also be at a different level than as the child of a stanza.

  57. ralphm

    I'll look into it later, when back home

  58. ralphm

    Still remote, but seems the log files at logs.jabber.org have 404'd since 2007, though there was always an index. Maybe intosi or Kev can comment on this.

  59. flow

    > Zash> I would guess that it makes sense to just always stamp on delay since the receiver should ignore what they don't understand

  60. flow

    then we should rename it to timestamps

  61. Zash

    When *delayed*, not always

  62. flow

    but then I need to check if my service would add <delayed/> by doing disco, no?

  63. flow

    background is https://medium.com/p/48806d283e6e/info

  64. Zash

    You know who did it by looking at the @from attribute

  65. Zash

    It seems sevral people seem to want to use delayed delivery for a generic timestamp thing. I think you need a new XEP with different semantics for that.

  66. flow

    I receive a message stanza, how do I know if it got delayed or not? If there is no <delay/> tag on it then it may also because the service does not add them at all

  67. Zash

    Well then you don't know.

  68. moparisthebest

    service discovery doesn't change that does it?

  69. flow

    moparisthebest, if the service announces the feature and if it is specified that it will add <delay/> if it does so

  70. flow

    I always felt that it would have been better if we hand't done <delay/> but <timestamp/>

  71. flow

    akin to what you'll find in your mail headers

  72. moparisthebest

    so you are trying to distinguish between "server announces delay but not marked delayed so it definitly wasn't delayed" and "maybe it was delayed maybe it was not" ?

  73. flow

    moparisthebest, yep

  74. Zash

    Why haven't you submitted a XEP about it?

  75. Zash

    You mean like trace headers, ie Received?

  76. moparisthebest

    I wouldn't advise showing "maybe it was delayed maybe not" to users, that kind of thing would anger them

  77. moparisthebest

    "XMPP sucks, can't even tell if it was delayed or not"

  78. Zash


  79. flow

    Zash, yes, like 'Received', I always expected that such a XEP does not has a chance of getting accepted

  80. moparisthebest

    I think it'd be better to always assume not delayed, then if a user complains, blame it on their network connection :D

  81. flow

    but I would possibly try anyway

  82. Zash

    flow: I want the part where it records the security status of the connection it received from

  83. moparisthebest

    so a "I promise it was encrypted but may be lying" element Zash ?

  84. flow

    Zash, good point, so we could sneak in timestamp by a generic "trace" extension xep

  85. flow

    which also records more metadata about the connection the stanza was received

  86. moparisthebest

    isn't e2e vastly superior there, aka "I promise was encrypted via this cryptographic proof"

  87. flow

    moparisthebest, depends on your goal

  88. flow

    it is mostly interestant for statistic and debug use cases, but not for protection/security

  89. flow


  90. Zash

    moparisthebest: It would be for debugging primarily, which also means it probably doesn't need to go on every stanza

  91. Zash

    Could go on a modified ping of some sort

  92. flow

    meh, but I want my timestamps on every stanza

  93. Zash

    flow: Take 203, reword the semantics, submit, ???, PROFIT!

  94. flow

    but the ping thing is interesting, that way you could record the stream information of every involved stream in both directions

  95. Zash

    Also, I'd wanna be careful with stuff that's added on every stanza

  96. flow

    true, but there is a need for timestamps and xep203 commonly gets misunderstood by people https://medium.com/@les92raf/oh-i-get-that-right-xep-0203-can-serve-as-timestamp-xep-cb20020e8104

  97. flow

    but maybe re-adding disco to xep203 and explicitly pointing out the use-case as "timestamp XEP" is sufficient

  98. Zash

    <time stamp="xep82" [ by="jid" ] />

  99. Zash

    But semaaaaaantics

  100. flow

    Zash, how about an (optional) 'from'?

  101. Zash

    flow: ?

  102. flow

    <time stamp="xep82" [ by="jid" ] [ from="jid" ] />

  103. Zash

    flow: Isn't it already?

  104. Zash


  105. Zash

    or wat

  106. flow

    isn't by the entity that adds the stamp?

  107. Zash

    flow: That's what I meant. What do you mean by from?

  108. Zash

    @from looks like an accomodation for legacy entity time things

  109. flow

    Zash, I would record the xmpp address of the entity from which the stanzas was received in the 'from' attribute

  110. flow

    again, think of mail's 'Recveived' header

  111. Zash

    flow: For the trace path use case? That makes more sense

  112. Zash

    Altho it might be redundant?

  113. Zash

    Also privacy considerations

  114. flow

    dunno, yes, I could also go on with <time/> without 'from'

  115. flow

    privacy considerations?

  116. Zash

    Leaking sender JID trough semi-anon MUCs and the like

  117. flow


  118. Zash

    If <time stamp="xep82"> means the timestamp that the original client sent it it then it makes sense

  119. Zash

    https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0203.xml is 404, what's with that?

  120. pep.

    I think that was mentioned already last week or this weekend

  121. pep.

    (but I don't remember)

  122. Zash

    I FIX

  123. jonas’

    any chance to un-break this link? http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/2018-07-05/#14:03:32

  124. Zash

    MMmmmm, if it's 404 it's likely among the files that were corrupted in the crash

  125. jonas’

    the recent one?

  126. jonas’

    because that’s after The Big Server Crash

  127. Zash


  128. Zash

    The trailing /

  129. jonas’

    timestamp anchor doesn’t work though

  130. Zash

    Those were not unique

  131. jonas’


  132. Zash

    Not sure why it didn't use them in the conversion tho

  133. Zash

    jonas’: Feeling up to some homegrown HTML template hackery?

  134. jonas’

    probably not

  135. jonas’

    I already parsed ldif in sed today, I think that’s enough

  136. Zash

    -- FIXME In the year, 105105, if MUC is still alive, -- if Prosody can survive... Enjoy this Y10k bug

  137. Zash

    jonas’: There's a semantic difference between foo and foo/ and it irks me

  138. Zash

    It's trying very hard to make something/ always be listings and something/foo be content

  139. Zash

    jonas’: http://logs.xmpp.org/xsf/2018-07-05/#14:03:32 works now?

  140. jonas’

    \o/ thank you :)

  141. jonas’

    since when do you have +w on that machine? good to know :>

  142. Zash

    Prosody stuff

  143. Zash

    Fixed the logs page to work with the Prosody version in use now.

  144. Arc

    GSoC is down to 37 minutes for applications

  145. jonas’

    Guus, ha, now that you’re around, please be notified that I made a card in the board trello, I hope I made it in the right place

  146. Seve checks

  147. jonas’

    oh right, seve too :)

  148. Guus

    I'm on mobile, hard to check

  149. Guus

    But if it's on the board somewhere, we will find it

  150. jonas’

    good :)

  151. jonas’

    it’s right on the top left, firts thing in agenda items

  152. Seve

    jonas’, ahh I didn't find it hah :D I moved to Itemos for discussion, since this is what we use currently

  153. Seve

    jonas’, thank you very much!!

  154. jonas’

    my last memory of it was that the leftmost column served as "inbox" and board would assign it to wherever. thanks Seve

  155. Seve

    Whatever works :)

  156. flow

    Zash, does that come close to your xmpp traceroute vision: http://geekplace.eu/xeps/xep-traceroute/xep-traceroute.html ?

  157. Zash

    In a 199 ping?

  158. flow

    Zash, that's mostly a "what if"

  159. flow

    the ping recipient probably won't do the right thing, so we need a custom IQ anyways

  160. flow

    …probably i think. I wondered if we could design something like that which does not require support from the recipient

  161. Zash

    And things adding stuff to IQ stanzas along the way is a bit weird

  162. flow

    true, message is also an option of course

  163. Zash

    flow: OF if everything along the way supports it then it doesn't matter

  164. flow

    Zash, which stanza type to use?

  165. Zash