ralphmCool. You could add labels for why the probe fails: maybe one for the mechanism, and one for the reason. Or something.
alacerhas joined
jonas’I don’t think that would be a valid use of labels
jonas’(they should be low-cardinality)
jonas’it could be made to export all offered SASL mechansims though
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
jonas’https://github.com/horazont/prometheus-xmpp-blackbox-exporter#build--usage more example output
lumihas joined
pep.That could replace xmpp.net to some extent I guess :)
jonas’that’s not the intention
alacerhas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
jonas’and ralph hasn’t even shouted at me yet, which is good
Douglas Terabytehas left
igoosehas left
rtq3has left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
j.rhas left
igoosehas joined
typikolhas joined
typikolhas left
j.rhas joined
xnamedhas joined
xnamedhas left
xnamedhas joined
xnamedhas left
xnamedhas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
xnamedhas left
alacerhas joined
alacerhas left
alacerhas joined
igoosehas left
Alexhas left
igoosehas joined
pdurbinhas joined
alacerhas left
Alexhas joined
rtq3has joined
ralphmHah. Indeed I approve!
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
igoosehas left
andyhas joined
Yagizahas joined
matlaghas left
matlaghas joined
Alexhas left
Alexhas joined
111has joined
igoosehas joined
111has left
APachhas left
typikolhas joined
typikolhas left
APachhas joined
alameyohas left
alameyohas joined
pdurbinhas left
andyhas left
igoosehas left
igoosehas joined
andyhas joined
Douglas Terabytehas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
Nekithas left
marc_has left
adityaborikarhas joined
debaclehas joined
rtq3has left
adityaborikarhas left
Douglas Terabytehas joined
COM8has joined
COM8has left
lovetoxhas joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Douglas Terabytehas left
Mikaelahas joined
MikaelaHi, how does XMPP handle organisations with 55 channels and managing them simultaneously e.g. by adding a moderator to all of them? https://talk.feneas.org/t/federated-instant-messenger-with-easy-access-control/68?u=mikaela
pep.I'm not sure I get the question. What kind of "managing" are you talking about?
pep.The way I'm picturing it atm is that it could very well be done the same way as IRC with a bot on each room, or at the server level directly. I don't know any specification for that
pep.Or even with a client.
MikaelaIf I had 55 XMPP MUCs, how would I add/remove moderators in all of them simultaneously? In IRC I can create a GroupServ group and give the GroupServ group access to 55 IRC channels and then add users to the group with flag +c so they would have access to everything the group can do
lovetoxMikaela, you develop server software that lets you do this
pep.GroupServ is not an IRC thing right? It's an implementation detail on some IRC network?
lovetoxwhat you are asking is basically you have a muc component on a server and want to administrate it in some ways
MikaelaI don't think this is very rare scenario, maybe the number of MUCs is, but I am under impression that XMPP and even Matrix think they are better than IRC, but they cannot handle groups at all. Then Slack came and it has same administrators in all rooms and now Riot wants to replace it and it seems unable to handle this scenario. I was hoping maybe I am wrong and XMPP handles this somehow natively, but I guess it's not designed for big teams either
lovetoxfirst server developers would need to give you these administration features
MikaelaGroupServ is part of Atheme IRC services, I am not sure if ANope has these
lovetoxthen clients could expose them via ad hoc commands to the server
pep.Mikaela, it's entirely doable, just that apparently nobody has needed this before
MikaelaI am happy to hear that
pep.Also, it's not hard to be better than IRC, when all the features are not native to the protocol but just implementation details :)
lovetoxMikaela, i understand the use case, but this is rather easy to do, but needs no XEP standards whatsoever
lovetoxjust write a plugin for prosody or ejabberd, that adds a jid to some muc member list table
pep.hmm, you might need to redefine the group on each MUC component though
lovetoxto execute this method we have already working mechanisms like ad hoc commands, where servers offer administration features
DanielYeah since you are in the channel for the protocol xmpp and not any specific implementation the answer is its pretty doable. If I were to be hired to do this (hypothetical) I'd to pretty much exactly what lovetox is suggesting. Write prosody module to configure global moderators. Expose control over adhoc
DanielAlso not sure if this covers your use case but server admins on ejabberd are automatically owners of every muc
pep.same in prosody
pep.But that doesn't cover the "group" thing, nor the "at the same time" I guess
DanielI mean it's probably not exactly what you need but it shows that something like this is possible
pep.It's all possible but it would be local to a MUC component always
MikaelaIt does partially, but I guess ideally all the admins wouldn't be server owners, but I am happy with these answers, thank you
pep.Mikaela, in prosody you can add component admins as well
pep.(I guess there's something similar in ejabberd?)
DanielOr make a bot that is server admin. That you can use to delegate this to
DanielThat would allow you to script in every language
DanielAnd not just the language the server is written in
pep.Someday we'll have prosody modules written in Rust! :)
igoosehas left
Alexhas left
adityaborikarhas left
Danielwrt mix it is interesting that I see more and more people asking for IRC level controls. Even 'voice' with voice by default presumably for the ability to soft ban people temporarily is something that people are now asking for
DanielWith channels becoming bigger and easier to find
Yagizahas left
pep.Does MIX not have some kind of access control?
lovetoxhttps://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7622#section-3.5 mentions a non-jid example quotation marks are not allowed in a localpart
lovetoxbut the defined UserCaseMapping, has no problems with this
pep.Daniel, hmm
Danielto be clear i'm not advocating for it to be in there
Danielit's just interesting to me. because until recently i didn’t think people needed that stuff
pep.Well tbh it's not like there's many people in our public rooms either
pep.I haven't seen that used on IRC for something other than spam-related stuff though
Danieloh from my brief experience the moderators of that one fairly popular public MUC are pretty strict and try to get every one on topic and even kick people and stuff
Danielwhich is not really how i would handle that and that's the reason i'm not in that muc
Danielbut maybe being strict on that kinda stuff is also why they are so popular
Danieldunno
adityaborikarhas joined
marc_has joined
davidhas left
igoosehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
adityaborikarhas joined
davidhas joined
COM8has joined
COM8has left
igoosehas left
waqashas joined
igoosehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
igoosehas left
rtq3has joined
adityaborikarhas joined
Yagizahas joined
rtq3has left
debaclehas left
igoosehas joined
adityaborikarhas left
Nekithas joined
goffihas left
goffihas joined
frainzhas left
frainzhas joined
goffihas left
goffihas joined
Douglas Terabytehas joined
igoosehas left
Douglas Terabytehas left
igoosehas joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
igoosehas left
igoosehas joined
Danielhas left
Danielhas joined
lovetoxfrom where does the rule come that Leading spaces in resourcepart is not allowed?
ZashDo you mean Nicknames?
ZashI don't think there's such a rule for resourceparts