XSF Discussion - 2020-05-26

  1. Guus

    Neustradamus_ Do you mean a feature where a ban can be defined for a certain period? That might make for an interesting add-on - but I'm thinking that more than 90% of the use case of banning would be to remove people permanently.

  2. Guus

    But I do not immediately see a reason why something like a ban period cannot be added.

  3. Neustradamus_

    Guus: Yes! But in XEP-0045 not in a new

  4. Guus

    Neustradamus_ XEP-0045 is not final, so you can propose a change.

  5. Holger

    I'd suggest avoid being banned by not going on people's nerves in the first place :->

  6. Daniel


  7. larma

    Neustradamus_, why is it important to be in XEP-0045 and not a new XEP?

  8. jonas’

    Link Mauve, AFAIK, @xml:lang is allowed everywhere and you don’t have to add support for it

  9. jonas’

    if you really wanted to specifically point at @xml:lang, you could declare it in the schema under a different prefix -- nobody forces you to use xml as prefix

  10. vanitasvitae

    > https://github.com/zoom/zoom-e2e-whitepaper Impressive that they got Mathew Green as an author

  11. jonas’

    > .pdf

  12. jonas’


  13. vanitasvitae

    yeah 😛

  14. vanitasvitae


  15. Guus

    hey, at least it's not a Word document.

  16. larma

    that zoom e2e thing makes no sense to me

  17. larma

    "Ed25519 is not FIPS approved but it's better, so we just do Ed25519 *and* P-384 for everything. Ed25519 for the securit and P-384 to make regulators happy"

  18. vanitasvitae


  19. larma

    This is what happens when you design crypto protocols with business in mind

  20. Neustradamus_

    It is better to have a full perfect XEP that several.

  21. Holger

    Why not put everything into a full perfect RFC 6120?

  22. wurstsalat

    don't feed him :D

  23. vanitasvitae


  24. vanitasvitae

    I'd write the IETF!

  25. Guus

    fwiw, to me, this particular feature seems more suitable to be injected in the existing XEP more than as a stand-alone one.

  26. larma

    Neustradamus_, it doesn't make a difference if you open issues everywhere "support new XEP for banning with period" or "support new version of XEP-0045"

  27. Guus

    be nice, guys.

  28. larma

    Guus, I think XEP-0045 is already too big and already has too many things not properly defined whereas others are defined down to the detail

  29. larma

    I mean, just a random example but but §10.3 and §10.6 are 1.5 pages virtually identitical text

  30. Guus

    larma not adding this won't change that, but at least it'll remain consistent. Also, I'm most unlikely to die on this particular hill.

  31. Seve

    I completely agree with that, Guus

  32. Guus

    larma not adding this won't change that, but at least it'll remain consistent if this is added. Also, I'm most unlikely to die on this particular hill.

  33. larma

    I mean, for this specifically I also won't mind

  34. larma

    The only problem I see is that it moves finalizing further away

  35. Guus

    Sure. I think we're pretty much agreeing on things.

  36. jonas’

    I think that xep-0045.xml should only receive bugfixes at this point, new features should go into inbox/

  37. Guus points at hill: "not where I'm going to die"

  38. jonas’

    not sure if that’s your choice ;P

  39. Guus

    I'm also not going to die on the hill that is the discussion on what hill I'm going to die on.

  40. Guus

    also, I find this morbid fascination slightly disturbing.

  41. jonas’

    you started it

  42. Guus

    Yes, talking about my own fascinations mostly 🙂

  43. jonas’

    also, the wife and I are watching The Good Place atm, some slight increase in comical morbidity is to be expected. (note: The Good Place is full of plot twists, so don’t read a plot summary if you’re curious)

  44. Guus

    Trying to play out Netflix eh? Fair warning: the end boss is hard.

  45. MattJ

    Sigh, jabber.org

  46. Guus

    Have you tried turning it off and on again?

  47. mathieui

    the turning off part is quite battle-tested at this point

  48. MattJ

    I'm not sure about that

  49. Guus


  50. Guus

    (ignore this)

  51. vanitasvitae

    interesting how frequent I now see message edits being used in XMPP 😀

  52. vanitasvitae

    very useful feature apparently

  53. Holger

    And WhatsApp doesn't have it!!!

  54. vanitasvitae


  55. Zash

    But WhatsApp was based on XMPP, therefore it's XMPP that's pathetic!!!!1!!!!!!eleven

  56. Neustradamus_

    vanitasvitae: There is always the problem about XEP-0308: Last Message Correction: History, there are all changes...

  57. pep.

    Neustradamus_, ask your client dev to fix this

  58. pep.

    It's possible for most cases

  59. pep.

    Also possibly combined with 0421

  60. Neustradamus_

    pep.: The XEP has been updated?

  61. pep.


  62. Neustradamus_


  63. pep.

    It doesn't need to?

  64. pep.

    The fact that clients don't group corrections in MUC history is only due to them not being able to assert it's the same user. 0421 gives them the ability (for MUCs that have it deployed, obviously)

  65. Neustradamus_

    rion: ^

  66. Neustradamus_

    Jabber.org has problem since several days no?

  67. Guus

    yes. The admins are already aware of the problems.

  68. Neustradamus_

    Guus: Thanks to confirm me! I have not contacted several days ago, but today there are lost messages...

  69. MattJ

    I've emailed Isode support. I've no idea what's wrong, and a restart didn't help

  70. Kev

    AFAICS it's working, just overloaded.

  71. Kev

    I'm watching authentications get logged. If I telnet to the port I get responses (slowly)

  72. jonas’

    I sometimes got successful connections when I tried to debug why I ran into timeouts while checking it

  73. jonas’

    so a fun DoS?

  74. Kev


  75. Zash

    Actual DoS or post-restart flood?

  76. Kev

    Don't know.

  77. jonas’

    needs more cloudflare

  78. Kev

    Seems to be completely responsive now, to me.

  79. Kev

    And CPU is no longer pegged.

  80. MattJ


  81. Neustradamus_

    Dear Jabber.org team, it is possible to have a special mucroom for it?

  82. MattJ

    Thanks for checking... if you don't see the cause then pretty sure I had no chance. I'll look at traffic next time perhaps

  83. Kev

    I couldn't see anything particular from any one host, it just seemed to be 'lots'.

  84. Kev

    As Zash says, the same sort you normally see swapming post-restart.

  85. Kev

    As Zash says, the same sort you normally see swamping post-restart.

  86. Guus

    'lots' being one more than many-many-three?

  87. Guus

    It's been to long since I opened a discworld book...

  88. Guus


  89. jonas’


  90. jonas’

    also: $ curl -vvsSL -o/dev/null https://observe.jabber.network 2>&1 | grep X-Clacks-Overhead

  91. jonas’

    it is surprisingly difficult to extract an HTTP header from curl

  92. Zash

    > Any namespaced elements can be used within a <command/>. Hmmmmmm.

  93. Zash

    Does anyone know if anything anywhere does ad-hoc commands with anything other than dataforms?

  94. jonas’

    I think my draft for ToS tried to