XSF Discussion - 2019-08-08

  1. Lance has left
  2. sonny has left
  3. lskdjf has joined
  4. lskdjf has left
  5. lskdjf has joined
  6. Steve Kille has left
  7. Zash has left
  8. lskdjf has left
  9. lskdjf has joined
  10. lskdjf has left
  11. lskdjf has joined
  12. lumi has left
  13. Lance has joined
  14. lskdjf has left
  15. Lance has left
  16. pdurbin has joined
  17. pdurbin has left
  18. neshtaxmpp has left
  19. neshtaxmpp has joined
  20. david has left
  21. david has joined
  22. waqas has joined
  23. Yagiza has joined
  24. pdurbin has joined
  25. pdurbin has left
  26. adityaborikar has joined
  27. andy has left
  28. xnamed has left
  29. moparisthebest has left
  30. moparisthebest has joined
  31. Nekit has joined
  32. waqas has left
  33. waqas has joined
  34. adityaborikar has left
  35. adityaborikar has joined
  36. LNJ has joined
  37. sezuan has joined
  38. pdurbin has joined
  39. Douglas Terabyte has left
  40. sezuan has left
  41. wurstsalat has joined
  42. adityaborikar has left
  43. Douglas Terabyte has joined
  44. jubalh has joined
  45. pdurbin has left
  46. sezuan has joined
  47. karoshi has joined
  48. pdurbin has joined
  49. jubalh has left
  50. kokonoe has left
  51. kokonoe has joined
  52. jonas’ and set it to moderated
  53. jonas’ someone with power must create the muc on muc.xmpp.org
  54. jonas’ you can’t just join there and create it
  55. adityaborikar has joined
  56. Ge0rG One does not simply...
  57. moparisthebest has left
  58. moparisthebest has joined
  59. alameyo has left
  60. alameyo has joined
  61. adityaborikar has left
  62. adityaborikar has joined
  63. alameyo has left
  64. Steve Kille has joined
  65. alameyo has joined
  66. Mikaela has joined
  67. alameyo has left
  68. alameyo has joined
  69. Zash has joined
  70. pdurbin has left
  71. alameyo has left
  72. alameyo has joined
  73. kokonoe has left
  74. Steve Kille has left
  75. Steve Kille has joined
  76. pdurbin has joined
  77. igoose has left
  78. igoose has joined
  79. debacle has joined
  80. waqas has left
  81. Holger I once moved a room by setting it to moderated and sending invites to the new room on join. Plus a message explaining things.
  82. Holger (One of the very few Prosody modules I wrote.) :-)
  83. lovetox has joined
  84. alameyo has left
  85. alameyo has joined
  86. andy has joined
  87. eevvoor has joined
  88. eve has left
  89. lovetox So MattJ would you be so kind and use your power to create the MUC
  90. eve has joined
  91. kokonoe has joined
  92. debacle has left
  93. winfried has left
  94. Dele (Mobile) has joined
  95. Dele (Mobile) has left
  96. pdurbin has left
  97. jubalh has joined
  98. lumi has joined
  99. igoose has left
  100. igoose has joined
  101. dele2 has joined
  102. flow yes, please :)
  103. afrogeek has left
  104. afrogeek has joined
  105. ralphm I can create it
  106. jonas’ yes please
  107. Ge0rG don't forget to give it a good name :)
  108. Zash xdev?
  109. Zash x is moar cool than j 🙂
  110. Holger .oO( Sounds like the beginning of a discussion that can easily take several weeks ... )
  111. jonas’ yog-sothoth@
  112. ralphm I gave it a great name: jdev
  113. Seve xdev +1 :(
  114. Zash Why not both, jxdev!
  115. Zash or xjdev
  116. jonas’ ... dev@ would do the trick too, it’s already on muc.xmpp.org
  117. ralphm This is not a democracy.
  118. Seve jonas’, true!
  119. jonas’ I hereby call for a member meeting to remove ralphm from Board</joking>
  120. Holger I would've suggested dev/devel/development as well, but there might be some value in sticking to the same name as the jdev@ mailing list.
  121. Zash Historical Reasons™
  122. Kev Or just sentimental value.
  123. ralphm jonas’: there's this member election coming up, though, where I have to renew.
  124. jonas’ consistency is nice
  125. ralphm Kev & jonas’: these.
  126. ralphm Also Zash
  127. Yagiza Hello!
  128. Yagiza About OMEMO implementation.
  129. Mikaela has left
  130. Yagiza When do I need to ask user if he trust the identity?
  131. Yagiza In save_identity or is_trusted_identity callback?
  132. Zash This sounds like a question for xmpp:jdev@muc.xmpp.org?join 🙂
  133. lovetox Yagiza, neither
  134. Nekit has left
  135. lovetox If signal asks is trusted, you return always true
  136. lovetox you have to implement your own trust management on top
  137. lovetox otherwise signal will not build sessions until user interacts with the client which would result in very bad UX
  138. pdurbin has joined
  139. Nekit has joined
  140. pdurbin has left
  141. pdurbin has joined
  142. Yagiza lovetox, so, I should always trust the identity, but notify user that identity cannot be trusted yet.
  143. Mikaela has joined
  144. lovetox depends on what you want to do
  145. lovetox What im saying is, you should circumvent signal trust management and always return True when signal lib asks you
  146. lovetox that does not mean you Trust anything though
  147. lovetox you have to add your own trust management on top of that
  148. lovetox could mean you trust on first contact, (blind trust), could mean you always want a user interaction before a message is sent ..
  149. lovetox whatever you think is in the security interests auf your users
  150. pdurbin has left
  151. adityaborikar has left
  152. adityaborikar has joined
  153. eve has left
  154. eve has joined
  155. Neustradamus has left
  156. lumi has left
  157. pdurbin has joined
  158. jubalh has left
  159. madhur.garg has joined
  160. adityaborikar has left
  161. adityaborikar has joined
  162. pdurbin has left
  163. georg has joined
  164. pdurbin has joined
  165. edhelas has left
  166. edhelas has joined
  167. rion has left
  168. rion has joined
  169. Nekit has left
  170. marc_ has left
  171. Nekit has joined
  172. debacle has joined
  173. lumi has joined
  174. Nekit has left
  175. Nekit has joined
  176. jubalh has joined
  177. jcbrand has left
  178. kokonoe has left
  179. adityaborikar has left
  180. adityaborikar has joined
  181. kokonoe has joined
  182. jcbrand has joined
  183. georg has left
  184. pdurbin has left
  185. eevvoor has left
  186. pdurbin has joined
  187. pdurbin has left
  188. pdurbin has joined
  189. neshtaxmpp has left
  190. pdurbin has left
  191. jubalh has left
  192. marc_ has joined
  193. neshtaxmpp has joined
  194. jubalh has joined
  195. neshtaxmpp has left
  196. neshtaxmpp has joined
  197. neshtaxmpp has left
  198. neshtaxmpp has joined
  199. jubalh has left
  200. madhur.garg has left
  201. sonny has joined
  202. alameyo has left
  203. alameyo has joined
  204. madhur.garg has joined
  205. nyco has joined
  206. adityaborikar has left
  207. adityaborikar has joined
  208. ralphm bangs gavel
  209. ralphm 0. Welcome + Agenda
  210. ralphm Who do we have?
  211. nyco _o/
  212. nyco and hi
  213. Seve Hello
  214. nyco quorum
  215. Guus ola
  216. ralphm MattJ: around?
  217. MattJ Here
  218. Seve Wow, nice
  219. ralphm CooL!
  220. ralphm 1. Minute taker
  221. adityaborikar has left
  222. adityaborikar has joined
  223. nyco ok...
  224. ralphm Thanks nyco
  225. ralphm 2. Compliance badges
  226. nyco yep, so
  227. nyco the poll has run
  228. nyco I can pack it and deliver it
  229. ralphm What's the gist?
  230. nyco also I can share the form and sheet with board members
  231. nyco but
  232. nyco we raised the question whether we wanted or not to enlarge the audience to standards@
  233. nyco so... 1. stop 2. more ?
  234. Chobbes has joined
  235. ralphm It depends, really. How many responses did you get and can we work with it?
  236. ralphm I'm not opposed to extending the audience
  237. Guus I think it's kind of silly to, after all these weeks and various discussions / emails, go back _again_ to asking for input.
  238. ralphm right
  239. ralphm I prefer to take a decision.
  240. Guus We're trying to pick a nice image here - it's not a life/death decision. Let's try to come to a conclusion.
  241. nyco all right
  242. Seve Yes, we have been talking about this for a bit already
  243. nyco I'll send the results... to what list?
  244. nyco also, who wants to have it shared?
  245. MattJ Have there been any responses from people saying they would definitely use them? I confess I haven't been keeping up to date, but I mostly/only(?) read negative comments
  246. ralphm I'm ok with sharing a quantative summary, not individual comments.
  247. nyco these are anonymous
  248. nyco 19 responses
  249. nyco ok, I'll send it to board@
  250. nyco next topic?
  251. ralphm thanks
  252. ralphm nyco: what
  253. ralphm 's the overal theme of the result?
  254. nyco our preferred badge
  255. nyco and predictions if it's gonna be used
  256. Nekit has left
  257. Nekit has joined
  258. ralphm You're not giving anything away, are you?
  259. lskdjf has joined
  260. nyco I gotta count
  261. ralphm oh
  262. ralphm Ok, moving on then.
  263. nyco spoiler warning: don't read what's next => opensourcedesign wins
  264. nyco spoiler warning: don't read what's next => people will use it
  265. ralphm Yay
  266. nyco that's positive to very positive
  267. Seve :)
  268. ralphm Let's then discuss it finally next week.
  269. ralphm 3. M-Sec
  270. ralphm This card has been on our agenda for a while
  271. adityaborikar has left
  272. adityaborikar has joined
  273. Guus If I recall correctly, this is the second email from the same project. I'm unsure if we handled the first one.
  274. ralphm I responded to their initial request, and they send a reply, but I haven't followed up since.
  275. Guus And did a second email / invitation then arrive again out of the blue?
  276. ralphm I think so
  277. Guus I remember thinking: "didn't they already reach out?"
  278. ralphm We got a response from Charlotte Tucker on May 17.
  279. ralphm Where they mentioned that they were primarily working on awareness, nothing in depth, yet
  280. Guus I found that response to be somewhat of a disappointment.
  281. Guus it didn't show any relation with XMPP, other than "you have a website and we'd like to use you to boost SEO"
  282. ralphm Yes, indeed.
  283. Seve I was not sure how we could create those 'synergies' between us
  284. Guus (this is from memory, I might be off a tad, but that was what my impression was)
  285. Guus If there's potential for XMPP usage / evangelism, I'm interested in pursuing furher (that was my thought to the initial email)
  286. ralphm Is this really a new e-mail? Because I haven't seen a repeat.
  287. Seve I didn't see anything related to XMPP last time. Do you know if they were using XMPP?
  288. Guus the second email made me question if it'd be in our interest to move further.
  289. ralphm Guus: for me? no
  290. Chobbes has left
  291. nyco to me it's disconnted
  292. ralphm It is the same text?
  293. Guus I'm unsure if there was really a new e-mail. Might be my email client acting up
  294. Guus in any case, this got me wondering: "We understand KEIO, our M-Sec partner (in CC), is already engaged with you."
  295. Guus I'd be interested in finding out what our relation with KEIO is.
  296. Seve Same here
  297. nyco https://github.com/nkzwlab
  298. ralphm Guus: I wrote this last time, so I think the answer is 'little':
  299. ralphm Thanks for reaching out to the XMPP Standards Foundation. The M-Sec Project seems like a great effort and looks interesting. I am aware that people at KEIO University have been involved with the XMPP community previously. E.g. around Efficient XML Interchange (EXI), internationalization of XMPP servers, as well as sensor networks over XMPP. Can you briefly go into how you think the XMPP Standards Foundation (or the XMPP community in general) could contribute to this project? Are you looking at using XMPP as a communication platform for chat (use case 2), sensor networks (use case 1), or the IoT use cases? Are you seeking guidance on the usage of protocols or libraries, or collaboration on defining new or improving existing XMPP Extension Protocols?
  300. Douglas Terabyte has left
  301. Seve Did we get a reply?
  302. ralphm Yes:
  303. ralphm At this initial stage (the first year of the project), we would be interested in a primary communications collaboration, in which we mutually cross-promote project activities and results (on social media, blogs, intermediary contacts, etc.). At this point, we are building up awareness of the project. We could spread your news in our communities and help you to continue being positioned as a thought-leader in this sphere. Do you currently use these platforms? - Social - Blog - Newsletter - Other platforms On our side, we are building social accounts, a blog and newsletter, as well as leveraging our partners' already well-established platforms. Then, we would be interested to discuss the ways to collaborate that you have mentioned in the coming months. We are working on defining the use cases and how they will be implemented in the smart cities of Santander and Fujisawa. Our partners in the M-Sec project would step into the conversation at this time.
  304. Guus ah, yes, this, apart from any lack of XMPP references, is what put me off from Charlotte's response: "Do you currently use these platforms?" To me, that's them putting in zero effort to finding out what we do. That does not bode well for future collaboration, in my view.
  305. ralphm I have not responded to that one, unfortunately, but I don't feel my questions were actually answered.
  306. Seve Ahh, right
  307. ralphm So until I see a different type of message, that doesn't sound like SEO, I think we do nothing.
  308. Guus In my view, we either do nothing, or give it one shot and express our concern that this looks like a buckshot attempt at SEO.
  309. ralphm If you really feel the latter is needed, I could
  310. Seve I'm fine with the collaboration on social media and such, but it looks like it is just that :/ Would have been great if they could reply to your response, ralphm. I would see it as beneficial for us if they use XMPP, otherwise makes no sense we continue with it
  311. Guus I don't think it's needed - but if there's a chance that this might turn out beneficial for the XSF / XMPP, we might want to give it one last shot.
  312. Guus but I'm equally happy with just dropping it.
  313. nyco if they want to google-bomb "m-sec", they'll have to fight against "meter per second"... good luck... a name change would be better :)
  314. adityaborikar has left
  315. ralphm hehe
  316. adityaborikar has joined
  317. ralphm Ok, I'll think about it for a bit. Moving on.
  318. ralphm 4. Roadmap
  319. ralphm I'm back from vacation and will do this before next meeting.
  320. ralphm 5. AOB
  321. ralphm ?
  322. MattJ None here
  323. Guus Any updates from the German effort?
  324. Guus Ge0rG ?
  325. Guus I'd love for that to take form / shape, as I think it could benefit XMPP.
  326. Seve Indeed
  327. ralphm I think it hasn't been two months yet.
  328. ralphm I assume Ge0rG will ping us when there's news.
  329. Guus Sure, but if we can proactively support Alex and him, I'd love for us to be ready for that.
  330. ralphm Of course.
  331. jubalh has joined
  332. Ge0rG No news. Sorry.
  333. Guus but lets discuss that with him present.
  334. Guus ah
  335. ralphm Ge0rG: so mostly waiting for now?
  336. Ge0rG I'd still like to know from Board what we would expect from that collaboration.
  337. Ge0rG ralphm: indeed.
  338. Seve Something we should have ready, I have to say. Just for when the time comes
  339. ralphm We'll, I'm mostly interested in what kind of things they want to 'fix' and what kind of regulation would help achieve this.
  340. Ge0rG ralphm: I suppose the goal is to enforce federation between IM networks, while preserving E2EE and user security and privacy.
  341. ralphm I mean, of course I'd love the whole world to use XMPP for all messaging, as people use SMTP for e-mail, but that seems a bridge too far for now.
  342. Guus I'm not expecting specifics, but I'd love for a result a la XMPP becoming the standard to be used by inter-governmental-agency communications.
  343. ralphm Right. I'm not even sure if that stated goal is actually achievable.
  344. Ge0rG indeed, mandating open standards for government IM needs, or even for all IM systems, would essentially mean XMPP
  345. ralphm But even if it is, what kind of 'features' are included in there? Just plain-text messages? Groups? Media?
  346. Guus let that be part of the to-be-had discussion with them.
  347. Guus let's first see if they're interested in moving towards something like this.
  348. ralphm So yeah, I'd like to participate asking such questions.
  349. ralphm Ge0rG: does that help at all?
  350. Ge0rG ralphm: a bit indeed. However I'm not sure how we can arrange such a discussion.
  351. eevvoor has joined
  352. Ge0rG This won't work easily if I'm a proxy.
  353. Guus if not a mandated solution, then at the very least recognision that XMPP is a good way to solve privacy / security IM issues within certain fields might be a nice outcome.
  354. adityaborikar has left
  355. Ge0rG In that case, we(the XSF) should rather prepare a list of questions and a list of demands/requirements
  356. Ge0rG And I can bring that in
  357. adityaborikar has joined
  358. ralphm Ge0rG: after their response, I suppose?
  359. Guus Ge0rG - what are your own thoughts here?
  360. Guus as you've brought it up in the first place, you must have some sort of desired end-result?
  361. Ge0rG ralphm: I'd like to get one step ahead of them
  362. Ge0rG I also need to separate my own desires from the official XSF voice.
  363. Seve Which are?
  364. Guus sure, but maybe they overlap, at least partially 😃
  365. Ge0rG I'd like to have a law mandating that IM systems over a certain size must expose an API/federation mechanism based on open standards.
  366. ralphm Ge0rG: I feel anyone here can express their desires, and then we come up with a rough consensus.
  367. Ge0rG The representative was very interested in E2EE, and I fear OMEMO won't cut it.
  368. Ge0rG So maybe we need to have some kind of MLS based proposal
  369. ralphm Ge0rG: do you mean public services?
  370. ralphm Ge0rG: do business-oriented platforms like Slack count?
  371. Guus MLS?
  372. Kev Guus: Standardised E2E.
  373. Kev https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/mls/about/
  374. Ge0rG ralphm: that's an excellent question
  375. Seve Ge0rG, https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/mls/about/
  376. Guus If there's interest in E2EE, and there's an observed lack of that in XMPP, then maybe an outcome could be grants to work on improving that.
  377. Seve it was for Guus and also late... :) Thanks Kev
  378. Ge0rG ralphm: I'd say that all commercial providers should have to do that.
  379. nyco has the gavel been banged?
  380. ralphm nyco: not yet
  381. Guus Ge0rG maybe we should start to create some sort of document to capture motives like these
  382. Ge0rG ralphm: there might be a set of useful objective criteria when to require support for federation
  383. MattJ Yeah, I have to prep for a meeting starting in 10
  384. winfried has joined
  385. Ge0rG Guus: did you say "wiki"?
  386. Guus maybe something less public
  387. Ge0rG Does that matter? Do we expect to get gamed by Facebook?
  388. Guus I'd hate to see ideas that we're not going to pitch in the end, find their way to people that we didn't want to pitch those ideas too.
  389. Ge0rG Guus: alright. Can you arrange for something?
  390. Seve Should we find the way to work on this via email instead (so we can free the Board members)
  391. Ge0rG Seve: some kind of etherpad maybe, communicated via email to Board + X(?)
  392. Guus something like that would work for me
  393. Guus People said they needed to go though.
  394. Guus maybe wrap this up?
  395. ralphm Sure, or just a mailing list might suffice.
  396. Ge0rG Sure
  397. Daniel Some politicians in Germany seem eager to get some form of regulation going. So the question is not 'is regulation a good thing' but instead can we help them to at least make this less idiotic
  398. ralphm Wrapping up.
  399. Seve Ge0rG, yes
  400. ralphm 6. Date of Next
  401. ralphm +1W
  402. ralphm 7. Close
  403. ralphm Thanks all!
  404. Guus Daniel +!
  405. ralphm bangs gavel
  406. nyco thx
  407. Seve Perfect, thank you guys :)
  408. Guus I'm unsure if I can make it next week.
  409. Guus Thanks guys!
  410. Daniel Also if they are going to regulate anyway I'd rather have them use xmpp than for example wire or matrix
  411. ralphm Daniel: understood. Elections coming up?
  412. Guus MattJ - could you arrange for a private mailing list for this to be set up, with your iteam hat on?
  413. Ge0rG I'd prefer an etherpad actually.
  414. Daniel ralphm: not really.
  415. Ge0rG We want to make a document after all
  416. nyco has sent the minutes
  417. Guus Ge0rG fine, etherpad it is - I've never created/used one of those though
  418. jubalh has left
  419. nyco has sent the results for the compliance badges poll
  420. jubalh has joined
  421. Nekit has left
  422. Nekit has joined
  423. lskdjf has left
  424. kokonoe has left
  425. kokonoe has joined
  426. Guus Thanks nyco - seems like a clear outcome to me.
  427. Guus let's discuss next week how to proceed. I'd love to quickly engage the author and see if he's interested in completing these designs.
  428. Ge0rG nyco: where did you send it to?
  429. Ge0rG Ah, to board@. What a pity.
  430. Nekit has left
  431. Nekit has joined
  432. eevvoor has left
  433. winfried has left
  434. adityaborikar has left
  435. adityaborikar has joined
  436. jubalh has left
  437. eevvoor has joined
  438. adityaborikar has left
  439. adityaborikar has joined
  440. sonny has left
  441. adityaborikar has left
  442. adityaborikar has joined
  443. pdurbin has joined
  444. eevvoor has left
  445. pdurbin has left
  446. winfried has joined
  447. adityaborikar has left
  448. sezuan has left
  449. xnamed has joined
  450. adityaborikar has joined
  451. Nekit has left
  452. Nekit has joined
  453. alameyo has left
  454. alameyo has joined
  455. alameyo has left
  456. adityaborikar has left
  457. alameyo has joined
  458. rion has left
  459. rion has joined
  460. curen has joined
  461. Lance has joined
  462. tijanjaOfficial has joined
  463. tijanjaOfficial has left
  464. alameyo has left
  465. alameyo has joined
  466. alameyo has left
  467. eevvoor has joined
  468. UsL has joined
  469. adityaborikar has joined
  470. Steve Kille has left
  471. patrick has joined
  472. mr.fister has joined
  473. derdaniel has joined
  474. jubalh has joined
  475. alameyo has joined
  476. Steve Kille has joined
  477. karoshi has left
  478. alameyo has left
  479. alameyo has joined
  480. igoose has left
  481. igoose has joined
  482. alameyo has left
  483. wojtek has joined
  484. alameyo has joined
  485. wojtek has left
  486. xnamed has left
  487. xnamed has joined
  488. murabito has joined
  489. waqas has joined
  490. waqas has left
  491. alameyo has left
  492. alameyo has joined
  493. jubalh has left
  494. waqas has joined
  495. pdurbin has joined
  496. alameyo has left
  497. curen has left
  498. alameyo has joined
  499. pdurbin has left
  500. eevvoor has left
  501. alameyo has left
  502. alameyo has joined
  503. karoshi has joined
  504. COM8 has joined
  505. COM8 has left
  506. COM8 has joined
  507. COM8 has left
  508. COM8 has joined
  509. COM8 has left
  510. alameyo has left
  511. alameyo has joined
  512. rion has left
  513. rion has joined
  514. eevvoor has joined
  515. vanitasvitae has left
  516. vanitasvitae has joined
  517. adityaborikar has left
  518. adityaborikar has joined
  519. Lance has left
  520. Guus jonas’ would you mind trying to crawl igniterealtime.org again? DH key size should be better now.
  521. eevvoor has left
  522. Lance has joined
  523. mr.fister has left
  524. debacle has left
  525. eevvoor has joined
  526. Lance has left
  527. jonas’ Guus, it runs into a timeout now, it appears my prosody isn’t getting a reply after it sent the stream header after STARTTLS
  528. Lance has joined
  529. Guus jonas’: that's odd. I've retreated away from the laptop, will investigate later
  530. Guus Thanks for trying
  531. jonas’ you’re welcome
  532. jonas’ Guus, FYI debug logs from my side https://paste.debian.net/hidden/fdf8e8df/
  533. Guus I noticed buffer sizing issues before, maybe that's what's going on here
  534. eevvoor has left
  535. dele2 has left
  536. Lance has left
  537. Neustradamus has joined
  538. Lance has joined
  539. pdurbin has joined
  540. valo has left
  541. pdurbin has left
  542. Lance has left
  543. waqas has left
  544. ziggys has joined
  545. ziggys has left
  546. Yagiza has left
  547. Lance has joined
  548. jonas’ thinking about introducing a "critical" (= you need to understand this element, otherwise reply with feature-not-implemented) attribute in XMPP, it’s not that easy actually.
  549. LNJ has left
  550. jonas’ for example, one can have content which is critical for a client to understand, but not for the servers (even possibly MUC servers, so the @to addressed entity) to understand, for example, a mandatory read receipt
  551. jcbrand has left
  552. jonas’ and then, one could imagine a thing which would need to be understood by a smart archive (for example, reactions), too
  553. jonas’ or stuff which needs to be only understood by forwarding servers (i.e. both users servers), like extended addressing for server-side carbon-copying or something
  554. waqas has joined
  555. Lance has left
  556. jcbrand has joined
  557. Zash You just need to invent a feature to advertise understanding of "critical" and mark it itself as critical `<feature var='critical' xmlns:critical='urn:xmpp:critical:sqrt(-1)' critical:critical='critical'/>`
  558. jonas’ you could’ve just written urn:xmpp:critical:i ;P
  559. debacle has joined
  560. jcbrand has left
  561. arc has joined
  562. eevvoor has joined
  563. lskdjf has joined
  564. lskdjf has left
  565. lskdjf has joined
  566. lskdjf has left
  567. lskdjf has joined
  568. sezuan has joined
  569. lovetox has left
  570. lskdjf has left
  571. sezuan has left
  572. Ge0rG You forgot to make it ALL UPPERCASE
  573. ralphm Ge0rG, Kev, Seve is anyone in our community involved in MLS?
  574. jcbrand has joined
  575. Ge0rG I'm not, but I'd like to if I find the time
  576. jonas’ ralphm, I think Dave participated in the earlier times on the mailing list
  577. Lance has joined
  578. ralphm I'm happy for the security mob to do their thing, but eventually we should probably have an XMPP proposal to use it.
  579. Ge0rG Yes
  580. ralphm Unsure when would be a good time to get involved, whether XMPP has particular properties that need to be taken into account.
  581. pdurbin has joined
  582. murabito has left
  583. ralphm But I guess dwd might have a better idea on this.
  584. valo has joined
  585. murabito has joined
  586. pdurbin has left
  587. eevvoor has left
  588. karoshi has left
  589. valo has left
  590. valo has joined
  591. neshtaxmpp has left
  592. neshtaxmpp has joined
  593. Wojtek has joined
  594. Wojtek has left
  595. adityaborikar has left
  596. adityaborikar has joined
  597. Lance has left
  598. debacle has left
  599. adityaborikar has left
  600. adityaborikar has joined
  601. Wojtek has joined
  602. neshtaxmpp has left
  603. Wojtek has left
  604. wurstsalat has left
  605. andy has left
  606. Wojtek has joined
  607. patrick has left
  608. Mikaela has left
  609. Nekit has left
  610. Wojtek has left
  611. UsL has left
  612. UsL has joined