From ben@nostrum.com Mon Jan 6 14:07:54 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5651AE1E0 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:07:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yoMvF2E-1SLm for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:07:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3397A1AE1C1 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:07:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.20.10.7] (mobile-166-147-070-187.mycingular.net [166.147.70.187]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s06M7cve045191 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:07:40 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) From: Ben Campbell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:07:32 -0600 Message-Id: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> To: XMPP Group Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 166.147.70.187 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Subject: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 22:07:54 -0000 (as chair) Hi, The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling = multi-domain hosting and server connection sharing. Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that = work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and = no other working group is chartered for that work. Several people have = proposed that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the = group that needs it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further = proposed that, we would try to keep it reasonably general, but would = focus on XMPP related requirements. Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a = working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep = in mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is = absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the = draft is a good start towards the milestone. Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20. Thanks! Ben.= From fippo@goodadvice.pages.de Mon Jan 6 14:14:47 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE221AE0CD for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:14:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zxXaUHnyQBlT for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:14:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from lo.psyced.org (lost.IN.psyced.org [188.40.42.221]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE3A51ACCE8 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:14:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (p54973F78.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.151.63.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by lo.psyced.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.4) with ESMTP id s06MEYTn007998 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 23:14:35 +0100 Message-ID: <52CB2AC3.5010906@goodadvice.pages.de> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 23:14:27 +0100 From: Philipp Hancke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xmpp@ietf.org References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 22:14:47 -0000 > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is a good start towards the milestone. > > Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20. Yes -- it solves a deployment problem and improves the current situation. I have some rough running code for it. It seems to be easy to implement, the specification is well written. I do FWIW not think that it solves the milestone you mention (we have DNA for that), but it's an important building block. From mwild1@gmail.com Mon Jan 6 14:16:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310031AE282 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:16:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AWj-C49T6kPe for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:16:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95781AE27E for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:16:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id hn9so3410153wib.0 for ; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:16:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Rml7NCfPEWSCUwYWQJGoMsYlrmw508VexWpLaqGPhQ4=; b=RRMFgcm+vZoxE2QCCCYeVVBtuhKTzto/gmTsyv+SVx+4UogxRnoHSjCawBripGMWu/ O2MIdpwLrG+WX4p38teD4yQNR45H2ZWHa6JsI+aNWBeeKP+mjiBUFgdWH+Tkp+sAswEA 8oD5iSLoouvQ1pVzgWhanAcMJt5jyHKULG8ylM5gCn24T1Vs1lP6Zf0uY8VNH/7USbHR EfYjWXXxQKukaPv1IBtcyHRYXeHpd4r8mHL8ViQkCEKKpN9tJVhBBVw/IY1BlBaV42BP Eon6hiapBtohdCuNJGSshP7AxUmX+Bsw/irL1+0H1mG4jILDQWzRDKnSIjguvlf/ncEp w21g== X-Received: by 10.180.206.41 with SMTP id ll9mr14013163wic.7.1389046602704; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:16:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.24.74 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:16:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> From: Matthew Wild Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 22:16:22 +0000 Message-ID: To: Ben Campbell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 22:16:53 -0000 On 6 January 2014 22:07, Ben Campbell wrote: > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a = working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in= mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is abso= lutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is= a good start towards the milestone. Yes, we should. It fills a necessary gap, and we have experimental implementations already without any major issues. Regards, Matthew From tmarkmann@googlemail.com Mon Jan 6 14:22:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479121AE28C for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:22:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.377 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4fa6dzOVyemX for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:22:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com (mail-wi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32E5C1AE27E for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:22:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id cc10so3417222wib.16 for ; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:22:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=AqXO/E71fjWTs9k0oGuO32oVfmJRud5SficEcHTKI10=; b=sqkyodRDHYTlBZl6qqZDAst9CeYaWseOEgVumJwbPuXJlGYm+XbBjWC+SjkvYOthbb QfUCEcCkm+UPFRHuBSmEEQ58ECrhP3LdjZ9iPtDSIADd3O7E3b4uyL5e4u+4ON5VO+mM 2nlii4DSzosgKPq5T+YbPvWARTtkYIOQCC/JYZx0C9ZMXOSIn71lvNLsHhjwoo5kNKJ1 1MBJxEHiell/AxUJJUtTXNBRk2OAlMzzJJY3Kk2DJ1+PjvcZbljnhK7yDh/pdHouDObJ oGhDwC0xBv/WC61tX576Jx++fB2eWCSvH7GN5a9BLjFmRwGiPgB0gefU5LC9IZvae3li Do8g== X-Received: by 10.180.36.231 with SMTP id t7mr14394560wij.40.1389046924132; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:22:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.86.196 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 14:21:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> From: Tobias Markmann Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 23:21:44 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ben Campbell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f6466f77d486004ef54b027 Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 22:22:15 -0000 --e89a8f6466f77d486004ef54b027 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi (this time to the whole list), On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling multi-domain > hosting and server connection sharing. > > Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that > work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no > other working group is chartered for that work. Several people have > proposed that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group > that needs it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed > that, we would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP > related requirements. > > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a > working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in > mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is > absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the > draft is a good start towards the milestone. > > Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20. > > Thanks! > Yes. I think we should adopt POSH. The XMPP community as a whole is on its way to ubiquitous encryption and authentication would be the obvious next step from here [1]. POSH plays an important role here, especially for hosted IM solutions, to bridge the time till DNSSEC and DANE is more widespread, a lot TLDs still don't support DNSSEC, including the in the IM world pretty popular .im TLD. I for one plan to update my current POSH implementation for the Prosody XMPP server, which I started at the POSH BOF meeting in Berlin. Cheers, Tobias [1] https://github.com/stpeter/manifesto/blob/master/manifesto.txt --e89a8f6466f77d486004ef54b027 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi (this time to the whole list= ),

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Ben Campbell=C2=A0<ben@nostrum.com= >=C2=A0wrote:
The XMPP working group has = a chartered work item for enabling multi-domain hosting and server connecti= on sharing.

Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that w= ork. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no ot= her working group is chartered for that work. Several people have proposed = that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group that nee= ds it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed that, we = would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP related re= quirements.

Should we adopt=C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mill= er-posh/=C2=A0as a working group item in support of the aforementioned = chartered work? Keep in mind that acceptance does not mean the work group t= hinks the draft is absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we = think that the draft is a good start towards the milestone.

Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by=C2=A0Jan 20.
=
Thanks!

Yes. I think we should adopt POSH. The XMPP community as a whole is on = its way to ubiquitous encryption and authentication would be the obvious ne= xt step from here [1]. POSH plays an important role here, especially for ho= sted IM solutions, to bridge the time till DNSSEC and DANE is more widespre= ad, a lot TLDs still don't support DNSSEC, including the in the IM worl= d pretty popular .im TLD. I for one plan to update my current POSH implemen= tation for the Prosody XMPP server, which I started at the POSH BOF meeting= in Berlin.

Cheers,
Tobias

[1]=C2=A0https://github.com= /stpeter/manifesto/blob/master/manifesto.txt

--e89a8f6466f77d486004ef54b027-- From ben@nostrum.com Tue Jan 7 07:16:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B221ADE72 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:16:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PDCFLrj90h4J for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:16:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 392691ADF2E for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:16:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s07FGZih098630 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 09:16:37 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: <52CB2AC3.5010906@goodadvice.pages.de> Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 09:16:34 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9364087C-F376-4726-9E19-37B6D9E2A3AF@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52CB2AC3.5010906@goodadvice.pages.de> To: Philipp Hancke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 15:16:52 -0000 On Jan 6, 2014, at 4:14 PM, Philipp Hancke = wrote: > I do FWIW not think that it solves the milestone you mention (we have = DNA for that), but it's an important building block. That is my understanding as well. It's a piece of the work, not all of = it. From stpeter@stpeter.im Wed Jan 15 10:49:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5A01AE3E7 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:49:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.44 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yHHvaQhHZ_5M for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E9DB1AE134 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-vpn-client-10-89-0-194.cisco.com (unknown [72.163.0.129]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55F7F40378; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:49:43 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:49:42 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: XMPP X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [xmpp] Position Paper on Strengthening XMPP X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:49:57 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have submitted an initial version of a position paper about strengthening XMPP for the W3C/IAB workshop to be held before IETF 89: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-strint-workshop-xmpp/ https://www.w3.org/2014/strint/ The document is a bit of a stub, so I would love to receive some feedback in the next 48 hours. I'll then submit a revised I-D for formal consideration by the workshop committee. Thanks! Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS1thGAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pLvwP/220ahT+W4lhJWzSrPEGHuef HFh7DSSSNfUTO+8JD/NlRsCGWBg5Uz2vIXoRRahXAiCa1T0YFk9T5tsAO9488tWq lgCfhjtUVq8fEzEHvS0w7c9TSlKVUGMH29Q4gLlFwlkCqsFSCJvYsZ86+I+fgnPX jAtf7k9BJD9CMxzf7LDbdx0nBvqPc0SRgYZFjnGGHpr0gOWmPOZf+gbFa6uCJYsJ lniYlwwE5r+bxE5orhTgDwZoAkyua829Yqq4NZkiwpWMDZRq/+bSbpZgjuf/MECo SCB9iQQz3phzZ7fKFdvSnNWUM31AwBFZHIX0eOzuTP9HCAT6tnCsTx/CMc8oUXVp mpoekm2ed6N+DGmZrgBWn3AjSxXCX80o7xKBDVtmgtg5oYQI2hw+qcv9w3JmMqHA QbzaDwXDLLAfG+vCKucgOwLctYrPmopcnbxz2bxaOkA29trRYYzIq/8Uhn3n8muT 1i+igp5Fr6cCQ3qZ2ojim91rCWSrDYHgz19lOMtZ+zm7+w78dQpZzZx8QqAWQCk6 uB+NBNdr5ysI7wpq2v9XRHy3cBiGZMBUQlOv0qbw9ChML4iFzJs+8IX4BJpsexyI i0XgzuPMkMOUlXpavFwUya7spPSXggQREhf9q3MXWW+DcGNtEl0k6gIpaCTyQXe2 d+moDu+bxZveMn1ZMD9T =w7rg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dave@cridland.net Wed Jan 15 12:15:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1AB61AE1CE for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.378 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iE2UPB5n43uB for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x22f.google.com (mail-ob0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 448A61AE153 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id uz6so1709115obc.20 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=XapQl9uTIp4wlVOXNAlOd36hfiKgrMFhYwOiTDd5I10=; b=h2yXH5RCmbdMMLlJjeLv7BqwLBguR3tau9/XB5rmqa9UtFRqf1stw09Iw5GCIXUmPG 7/i0EyCsNIqYxELvOGmYYxE5VPQITnmlWrc0ruT9S1Ho0JiJFbYQ8tiYV04htSmP+qiB J1AOAsdzRd+tOzTOUDOTuJx0AW/9pkk6diCjY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=XapQl9uTIp4wlVOXNAlOd36hfiKgrMFhYwOiTDd5I10=; b=aQcf138ZvoOnDegZGdGKwrvCBXnZBrugSwDbozJ23sCCFguPDE6oVvQ1ebLk2mX3o1 4y7eKJB5X2TKqkWXXJ5iPcYspyx8SYAWCK9T3nqE3MLL8yaRHYkKzlBCZDY8NbDBL8AA qgV8ozVR5TigQf6mGAvNyXqJFgMq0yRa5do+WQHQ9VDKu+JjMtXIcMZan92iSMTV84s3 +O6CVJwqEKqTq6nBfWHd9lylWqpoETd/xw7MKpBVtnk4ZEI0e72xRoNYGu/0SzWI8kp5 418W6u0nhK3G9OiEBRW28vE1aWDFv2PJ9nMGBYge57F8kkVuYSvZewDrAd7qlA1HZ7Ph hjbg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnRr7Jqf/2zRZC8r0VPNBrL3ZorHKEttDWsGCkbWiy7n46bOq3UN69jC/xrRgPF4IX/dY7i MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.228.135 with SMTP id si7mr3419426oec.4.1389816903278; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.55.138 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:15:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> References: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:15:03 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dave Cridland To: Peter Saint-Andre Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11363910d2b9ad04f007f64c Cc: XMPP Subject: Re: [xmpp] Position Paper on Strengthening XMPP X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:15:20 -0000 --001a11363910d2b9ad04f007f64c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Is this somewhere in XML form? I'll wordsmith a patch. It'd be interesting to discuss the (now ancient history) of C2S security pushes, I suspect. On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I have submitted an initial version of a position paper about > strengthening XMPP for the W3C/IAB workshop to be held before IETF 89: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-strint-workshop-xmpp/ > > https://www.w3.org/2014/strint/ > > The document is a bit of a stub, so I would love to receive some > feedback in the next 48 hours. I'll then submit a revised I-D for > formal consideration by the workshop committee. > > Thanks! > > Peter > > - -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) > Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS1thGAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pLvwP/220ahT+W4lhJWzSrPEGHuef > HFh7DSSSNfUTO+8JD/NlRsCGWBg5Uz2vIXoRRahXAiCa1T0YFk9T5tsAO9488tWq > lgCfhjtUVq8fEzEHvS0w7c9TSlKVUGMH29Q4gLlFwlkCqsFSCJvYsZ86+I+fgnPX > jAtf7k9BJD9CMxzf7LDbdx0nBvqPc0SRgYZFjnGGHpr0gOWmPOZf+gbFa6uCJYsJ > lniYlwwE5r+bxE5orhTgDwZoAkyua829Yqq4NZkiwpWMDZRq/+bSbpZgjuf/MECo > SCB9iQQz3phzZ7fKFdvSnNWUM31AwBFZHIX0eOzuTP9HCAT6tnCsTx/CMc8oUXVp > mpoekm2ed6N+DGmZrgBWn3AjSxXCX80o7xKBDVtmgtg5oYQI2hw+qcv9w3JmMqHA > QbzaDwXDLLAfG+vCKucgOwLctYrPmopcnbxz2bxaOkA29trRYYzIq/8Uhn3n8muT > 1i+igp5Fr6cCQ3qZ2ojim91rCWSrDYHgz19lOMtZ+zm7+w78dQpZzZx8QqAWQCk6 > uB+NBNdr5ysI7wpq2v9XRHy3cBiGZMBUQlOv0qbw9ChML4iFzJs+8IX4BJpsexyI > i0XgzuPMkMOUlXpavFwUya7spPSXggQREhf9q3MXWW+DcGNtEl0k6gIpaCTyQXe2 > d+moDu+bxZveMn1ZMD9T > =w7rg > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > --001a11363910d2b9ad04f007f64c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is this somewhere in XML form? I'll wordsmith a patch.=

It'd be interesting to discuss the (now ancient his= tory) of C2S security pushes, I suspect.


On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Peter S= aint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have submitted an initial version of a position paper about
strengthening XMPP for the W3C/IAB workshop to be held before IETF 89:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-= strint-workshop-xmpp/

https://www.w= 3.org/2014/strint/

The document is a bit of a stub, so I would love to receive some
feedback in the next 48 hours. I'll then submit a revised I-D for
formal consideration by the workshop committee.

Thanks!

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http:= //gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS1thGAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pLvwP/220ahT+W4lhJWzSrPEGHuef
HFh7DSSSNfUTO+8JD/NlRsCGWBg5Uz2vIXoRRahXAiCa1T0YFk9T5tsAO9488tWq
lgCfhjtUVq8fEzEHvS0w7c9TSlKVUGMH29Q4gLlFwlkCqsFSCJvYsZ86+I+fgnPX
jAtf7k9BJD9CMxzf7LDbdx0nBvqPc0SRgYZFjnGGHpr0gOWmPOZf+gbFa6uCJYsJ
lniYlwwE5r+bxE5orhTgDwZoAkyua829Yqq4NZkiwpWMDZRq/+bSbpZgjuf/MECo
SCB9iQQz3phzZ7fKFdvSnNWUM31AwBFZHIX0eOzuTP9HCAT6tnCsTx/CMc8oUXVp
mpoekm2ed6N+DGmZrgBWn3AjSxXCX80o7xKBDVtmgtg5oYQI2hw+qcv9w3JmMqHA
QbzaDwXDLLAfG+vCKucgOwLctYrPmopcnbxz2bxaOkA29trRYYzIq/8Uhn3n8muT
1i+igp5Fr6cCQ3qZ2ojim91rCWSrDYHgz19lOMtZ+zm7+w78dQpZzZx8QqAWQCk6
uB+NBNdr5ysI7wpq2v9XRHy3cBiGZMBUQlOv0qbw9ChML4iFzJs+8IX4BJpsexyI
i0XgzuPMkMOUlXpavFwUya7spPSXggQREhf9q3MXWW+DcGNtEl0k6gIpaCTyQXe2
d+moDu+bxZveMn1ZMD9T
=3Dw7rg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
xmpp mailing list
xmpp@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp

--001a11363910d2b9ad04f007f64c-- From stpeter@stpeter.im Wed Jan 15 12:27:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60AA71AE233 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:27:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.44 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KBI0GYeqUXCV for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:27:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E37F1AE0D5 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [64.101.72.104]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4723440378; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:27:21 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <52D6EF26.9040304@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:27:18 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Cridland References: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: XMPP Subject: Re: [xmpp] Position Paper on Strengthening XMPP X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:27:35 -0000 On 1/15/14 1:15 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: > Is this somewhere in XML form? I'll wordsmith a patch. The .xml is linked from http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-strint-workshop-xmpp/ It's also here: https://github.com/stpeter/xmpp-sec/blob/master/draft-saintandre-strint-workshop-xmpp.xml Peter From fippo@goodadvice.pages.de Wed Jan 15 22:42:38 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 944F41AE2C6 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:42:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FJ7jFzQVXzmi for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:42:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from lo.psyced.org (lost.IN.psyced.org [188.40.42.221]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 554731AE22E for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:42:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.101] (p54973969.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.151.57.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by lo.psyced.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.4) with ESMTP id s0G6gLjw005270 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:42:22 +0100 Message-ID: <52D77F46.9080901@goodadvice.pages.de> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:42:14 +0100 From: Philipp Hancke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xmpp@ietf.org References: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: <52D6D846.7060607@stpeter.im> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xmpp] Position Paper on Strengthening XMPP X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:42:38 -0000 Am 15.01.2014 19:49, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I have submitted an initial version of a position paper about > strengthening XMPP for the W3C/IAB workshop to be held before IETF 89: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-strint-workshop-xmpp/ > > https://www.w3.org/2014/strint/ > > The document is a bit of a stub, so I would love to receive some > feedback in the next 48 hours. I'll then submit a revised I-D for > formal consideration by the workshop committee. Looks good in general. I think it would make sense to note that XMPP does not attempt to hide / protect communication metadata. That's just the way it is. There might be some techniques (based on servers adding a from to a stanza before sending it out or xep-0198 acks) to make length-based guessing harder by adding a different padding on different streams. But I don't expect those to effectively counter any sophisticated attack due to lack of randomness. philipp From internet-drafts@ietf.org Thu Jan 23 11:05:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DFDD1A0123; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:05:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G80J6U8LrGcA; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:05:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3C51A00AA; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:05:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.90.p2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140123190554.29728.40387.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:05:54 -0800 Cc: xmpp@ietf.org Subject: [xmpp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10.txt X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:05:59 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protoco= l Working Group of the IETF. Title : Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)= : Address Format Author : Peter Saint-Andre Filename : draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10.txt Pages : 25 Date : 2014-01-23 Abstract: This document defines the address format for the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), including support for code points outside the ASCII range. This document obsoletes RFC 6122. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From stpeter@stpeter.im Thu Jan 23 11:06:44 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201561A01BE for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:06:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jc0YxA5OWj8V for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:06:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5541A0211 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:06:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.10] (unknown [24.8.129.242]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 592C4400AD; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:06:36 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <52E1683B.4060207@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:06:35 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xmpp@ietf.org References: <20140123190554.29728.40387.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140123190554.29728.40387.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xmpp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10.txt X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:06:44 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Just updating the references... On 01/23/2014 12:05 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. This draft is a work item of the Extensible Messaging > and Presence Protocol Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol > (XMPP): Address Format Author : Peter Saint-Andre Filename > : draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10.txt Pages : 25 Date > : 2014-01-23 > > Abstract: This document defines the address format for the > Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), including > support for code points outside the ASCII range. This document > obsoletes RFC 6122. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis/ > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-10 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at > tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS4Wg7AAoJEOoGpJErxa2puUgP/3xaunMvs8+iVaeJvBPikG1Z q0nkLuv3ztcLNyA6+0+KMRqwLxKI9bLRiI9xvEqDtn/a8m0jNDVEIUpoPTo01W6M XS/yNfP+BRJwCDndVXVEMy+5/NRNBdA+WErrzgNUfjKSerOTnIf/zgKQUxkd5efz U2GciEk11CJVNqiRMla8zEBA8CjWXY5WeS2lEZDuRKXLkdw27DR7RPyGsVLvWIwZ HD1oDkF50aregJuhqrM6rcOFSv3khMBFyUi84vrozXXsautOhdJLnoeHdYP4mFZY BWMK6kAUd6rBMyZ3znXNlzELbTQ04AhFBerxHG8fwTJSND215YhsfjZnzVmFkTcA MDwGpwlmYf9HKgypHqftu7eYmyfzoaCI23T4TT4Kon//0IKUUykAXZuDLVpfSHCS qxbmbeYNkTnXvxAxbLFFMEROjJWSM4o/nUdmdI6+2n648wkfIcgKmawMQRByrBq5 BhJPcKDZZBUPUnb6HhkryVU6q0+a7sW8DojQqioJmeWhJ39lCCepi1bvcD6EVa2b 4PtP10Eiv64otF/1XcPJCxoiFUe1vSC3JCyUz9PIW9n77QTmRw3oLXzG5bn6yJVB CRVL4pPYJ8DmNy2nL2hKjsgSqDd+6zkgow+oz/doJ0WBE8IbW2h02QQ/SUWPQnfS SuMN9n58pL505I+r993F =SYdd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stpeter@stpeter.im Thu Jan 23 18:04:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4881C1A02C8 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 18:04:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AzsAUUMOYlYT for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 18:04:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766CA1A0211 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 18:04:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (unknown [24.8.184.175]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05033400AD; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:04:22 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <52E1CA26.5000901@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:04:22 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: XMPP Working Group References: <20140123212619.17519.66257.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140123212619.17519.66257.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20140123212619.17519.66257.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [xmpp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 02:04:26 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I added a bit to the security considerations... - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:26:19 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Peter Saint-Andre , Peter Saint-Andre A new version of I-D, draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt has been successfully submitted by Peter Saint-Andre and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls Revision: 04 Title: Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) in the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) Document date: 2014-01-23 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 10 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls/ Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04 Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04 Abstract: This document provides recommendations for the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) in the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). This document updates RFC 6120. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS4colAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pfKoP/As9w5Jl/R0usCA7u69hKJKw Ct8E3LL0HHz3kMLKKPlTrL7+qCqNXK2yKI5yfRbcBeg/0D2cUOtnNwhZPO+rFzWH K3q3A6zf/o+tLvw8ISPFDsrd1eXESNDBA620tieVEbJyT016+TuEHq/do9UDNnfW usyfPxutvFjI9hCgMNsR8FvIfFsiuKDUNxfGx+x6n4twIUSK5VRJlF4kbMVdATzz eypsFBTk+Y7WCRowPguUvqMURvoGiL3pqAXF5+DxzwobGlbpQh0kZlV+oiYHPksb d5uc1BYltcqbrC/vOoHOvA8sa7B49ZceqqcFYtb1NnTSlWzf+QPQi4FU2nRVK0zL 8SfJcX3ISeg4NJJBnJtiR1+wdkk8LduIqUfIcFoG03c/UBgARs8ukmgNMUqEI1bH dLQiYTdhD0MfQ2OmDcxaIpK56TNdn14aXG5nPCTd3ogA3Yx9IyxsA9fUF/nmvYkN cgszi2bG392S8AcAefXvu0QRg2wj38o8jQrE0yKfWjCKflIlbwOmnZ0pteFSFFpO XdUTZs0t3p9emcehoSZgX2KjigtI6PzH+cMl4vR2WLjtydz1bpDz0hltHGBTBEdb BoxTWqCTtcImKBhymrcnkgrFWl6RH74C4iMpxawUL7fSh7woJ9prsuQ5MVAs6r0z OWh3sy4JLxSXXztvVE9C =BwqQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dave@cridland.net Mon Jan 27 09:39:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD261A0256 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.378 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N00j7_uDXHpf for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oa0-x230.google.com (mail-oa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFFD61A0153 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l6so7067375oag.35 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=yKmQ/q93g19kqq1pMnevtac2q73VRQECG5hTGnTG2S0=; b=NqhBgG0Ker029qamOdLdvKtlfQRZLgq2UNq41/r3piWo8Q1U90k1Q0xIerWDs9Bk03 fR4QkFjN24yTx0EVFpZwcjbQqXxzOL/yUdIZpUimhqhyvFwGxIlSxI6Q5VdWSQOMSHTx Y79yrJX5PBCmbTK7dT8trwfnZu1PC9HhU7CUM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yKmQ/q93g19kqq1pMnevtac2q73VRQECG5hTGnTG2S0=; b=HoTjuc4++YzwkojrK9Mj0ktChWFugG87U1uIhVZ3CYo70sDnIBKvNJ50lFClApyeau 8uT/JaOXlAHjtTz8D8MsCyUQ0LpWevFfgmukXuYHKX9PC46jEw+zoYXqm9C6F9YCqgJn HCicpkUd1A69H4syWXCqAacBhrBPvMH53+E1uQyhbOm/idFMAgT1+S5ysnuCR0n5lpAd fQqxsWUc+lyJVlxLvFA0SX4YuUsoDy+fBhlzblP3LlJOhMS5r3FPCgsYEzFjusl0G2zG 1aPBxRSW6FlSqoqcY3j03K7AWCOdAFgxWhjzqK1W7AhWh7bnvRe1r0gUoTscwO3LfzsR taGg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlE8CTW1sUFtceDvgr7vDn9YeJ2ikq6JZmTa+dAScqttun/FXgeLk6rbeCeMj0ughN8kYh5 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.103.133 with SMTP id fw5mr2556067obb.43.1390844371485; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.55.138 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:39:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E1CA26.5000901@stpeter.im> References: <20140123212619.17519.66257.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52E1CA26.5000901@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 17:39:31 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dave Cridland To: Peter Saint-Andre Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01184702b4c20704f0f73052 Cc: XMPP Working Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 17:39:36 -0000 --089e01184702b4c20704f0f73052 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I read through this (or rather, read through the diff2). Two points: 1) I noticed you've changed SSLv3 and TLSv1.0 from SHOULD NOT to MAY. I don't think we really want to be suggesting that SSLv3 in particular is a neutral decision; I think, though, that offering it as a server is reasonable. Is it worth splitting the requirement levels between initiator and receiver, something like: XMPP implementations MAY offer SSLv3 in the receiving role, however SHOULD NOT negotiate it in the initiating role, preferring later versions. I'm not so sure about the TLSv1.0 levels, I'll defer to more cryptographically minded folk on that one. 2) For Security Considerations: It's trivial for an attacker to observe data between two servers, and given the lack of obfuscation, it'd be fairly trivial to handle stanza counts. If all the hops are under scrutiny, then it's fairly easy to observe the stanzas on each hop and establish who is talking to whom. If you'd like some "proper RFC" text for this I can think on it (but I'm travelling shortly as you know). On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:04 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I added a bit to the security considerations... > > > - -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:26:19 -0800 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: Peter Saint-Andre , Peter Saint-Andre > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt > has been successfully submitted by Peter Saint-Andre and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls > Revision: 04 > Title: Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) in the Extensible > Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) > Document date: 2014-01-23 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 10 > URL: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls/ > Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04 > Diff: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04 > > Abstract: > This document provides recommendations for the use of Transport Layer > Security (TLS) in the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol > (XMPP). This document updates RFC 6120. > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > The IETF Secretariat > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS4colAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pfKoP/As9w5Jl/R0usCA7u69hKJKw > Ct8E3LL0HHz3kMLKKPlTrL7+qCqNXK2yKI5yfRbcBeg/0D2cUOtnNwhZPO+rFzWH > K3q3A6zf/o+tLvw8ISPFDsrd1eXESNDBA620tieVEbJyT016+TuEHq/do9UDNnfW > usyfPxutvFjI9hCgMNsR8FvIfFsiuKDUNxfGx+x6n4twIUSK5VRJlF4kbMVdATzz > eypsFBTk+Y7WCRowPguUvqMURvoGiL3pqAXF5+DxzwobGlbpQh0kZlV+oiYHPksb > d5uc1BYltcqbrC/vOoHOvA8sa7B49ZceqqcFYtb1NnTSlWzf+QPQi4FU2nRVK0zL > 8SfJcX3ISeg4NJJBnJtiR1+wdkk8LduIqUfIcFoG03c/UBgARs8ukmgNMUqEI1bH > dLQiYTdhD0MfQ2OmDcxaIpK56TNdn14aXG5nPCTd3ogA3Yx9IyxsA9fUF/nmvYkN > cgszi2bG392S8AcAefXvu0QRg2wj38o8jQrE0yKfWjCKflIlbwOmnZ0pteFSFFpO > XdUTZs0t3p9emcehoSZgX2KjigtI6PzH+cMl4vR2WLjtydz1bpDz0hltHGBTBEdb > BoxTWqCTtcImKBhymrcnkgrFWl6RH74C4iMpxawUL7fSh7woJ9prsuQ5MVAs6r0z > OWh3sy4JLxSXXztvVE9C > =BwqQ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > --089e01184702b4c20704f0f73052 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I read through this (or rather, read through the diff2). T= wo points:

1) I noticed you've changed SSLv3 and TLS= v1.0 from SHOULD NOT to MAY.

I don't think we really= want to be suggesting that SSLv3 in particular is a neutral decision; I th= ink, though, that offering it as a server is reasonable.

Is it worth splitting the requirement levels between in= itiator and receiver, something like:

XMPP impleme= ntations MAY offer SSLv3 in the receiving role, however SHOULD NOT negotiat= e it in the initiating role, preferring later versions.

I'm not so sure about the TLSv1.0 levels, I'll = defer to more cryptographically minded folk on that one.
2) For Security Considerations: It's trivial for an attack= er to observe data between two servers, and given the lack of obfuscation, = it'd be fairly trivial to handle stanza counts. If all the hops are und= er scrutiny, then it's fairly easy to observe the stanzas on each hop a= nd establish who is talking to whom. If you'd like some "proper RF= C" text for this I can think on it (but I'm travelling shortly as = you know).


On Fri,= Jan 24, 2014 at 2:04 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>= wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I added a bit to the security considerations...


- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:26:19 -0800
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org<= /a>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <ietf@stpeter.i= m>, Peter Saint-Andre
<ietf@stpeter.im>


A new version of I-D, draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls-04.txt
has been successfully submitted by Peter Saint-Andre and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls
Revision: =A0 =A0 =A0 04
Title: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) in the Exte= nsible
Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)
Document date: =A02014-01-23
Group: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Individual Submission
Pages: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A010
URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandr= e-xmpp-tls-04.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-xmpp-tls/<= /a>
Htmlized: =A0 =A0 =A0 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandr= e-xmpp-tls-04
Diff:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-saintandre-xmpp= -tls-04

Abstract:
=A0 =A0This document provides recommendations for the use of Transport Laye= r
=A0 =A0Security (TLS) in the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol
=A0 =A0(XMPP). =A0This document updates RFC 6120.





Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: GPGTools - http:= //gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS4colAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pfKoP/As9w5Jl/R0usCA7u69hKJKw
Ct8E3LL0HHz3kMLKKPlTrL7+qCqNXK2yKI5yfRbcBeg/0D2cUOtnNwhZPO+rFzWH
K3q3A6zf/o+tLvw8ISPFDsrd1eXESNDBA620tieVEbJyT016+TuEHq/do9UDNnfW
usyfPxutvFjI9hCgMNsR8FvIfFsiuKDUNxfGx+x6n4twIUSK5VRJlF4kbMVdATzz
eypsFBTk+Y7WCRowPguUvqMURvoGiL3pqAXF5+DxzwobGlbpQh0kZlV+oiYHPksb
d5uc1BYltcqbrC/vOoHOvA8sa7B49ZceqqcFYtb1NnTSlWzf+QPQi4FU2nRVK0zL
8SfJcX3ISeg4NJJBnJtiR1+wdkk8LduIqUfIcFoG03c/UBgARs8ukmgNMUqEI1bH
dLQiYTdhD0MfQ2OmDcxaIpK56TNdn14aXG5nPCTd3ogA3Yx9IyxsA9fUF/nmvYkN
cgszi2bG392S8AcAefXvu0QRg2wj38o8jQrE0yKfWjCKflIlbwOmnZ0pteFSFFpO
XdUTZs0t3p9emcehoSZgX2KjigtI6PzH+cMl4vR2WLjtydz1bpDz0hltHGBTBEdb
BoxTWqCTtcImKBhymrcnkgrFWl6RH74C4iMpxawUL7fSh7woJ9prsuQ5MVAs6r0z
OWh3sy4JLxSXXztvVE9C
=3DBwqQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
xmpp mailing list
xmpp@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp

--089e01184702b4c20704f0f73052-- From holler@ahsoftware.de Thu Jan 30 00:47:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE641A04F8 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 00:47:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.208 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sx17R8w0L6sw for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 00:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ahsoftware.de (h1446028.stratoserver.net [85.214.92.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0471A03C0 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 00:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 919EB423C293; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:46:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiche.ahsoftware (p57B2361D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.54.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D466C423C293 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:46:50 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 5EC977F9DF; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:46:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from krabat.ahsoftware (unknown [IPv6:feee::5246:5dff:fe8b:95f8]) by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118677F840; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 08:46:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:46:41 +0100 From: Alexander Holler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 08:47:00 -0000 Am 06.01.2014 23:07, schrieb Ben Campbell: > > (as chair) > > Hi, > > The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling multi-domain hosting and server connection sharing. > > Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no other working group is chartered for that work. Several people have proposed that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group that needs it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed that, we would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP related requirements. > > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is a good start towards the milestone. > > Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20. > Why does it use JSON and not XML? This makes it necessary to use another parser besides the XML-parser already available in http- and xmpp-clients and servers. And if uses JSON, please make sure to define how comments will have to look. Last time I looked at the JSON spec, it didn't know comments, something I have no comment for. ;) Regards, Alexander Holler From tmarkmann@googlemail.com Thu Jan 30 01:13:44 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E3C1A0417 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.377 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 37NXJYJzsPi3 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yk0-x22c.google.com (mail-yk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC5011A03E9 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yk0-f172.google.com with SMTP id 200so14383799ykr.3 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=IL5dS8tDgB9u+XzfFAYmBMV2McuyzrwdV8jXs36hGxk=; b=VFMo07CUI1GRvwToSRm9d6QUo6v+yROxkEPorDq7FPmxsqaMdHM6z+M5m2SE0uh5wf EQyDLyDAFFCLa3X1oJGX/OK9A0sNMuCtNX5/td2kDFpTsrvVezCCgKVoXSV8DBVEwpfC atd/IogzxrwrhBSRbC0Cqs+LxyKmRPm+xoktjDD+Ds+Re0oYfVP6e38BMyeow1Ykr+XG 18/wRG5yHTAjRrQp+zRLTYU0tjJq/uHo6cR2W/QKJyfaEPNDmcWUEACIFNtGIdVOrasO oCPoHjbd3FDCxQXOUrlQE6coG0vIH4CluZ2UTdWJSkAHDwiatyWZuy93UVUlPOVpQJ5d kwUw== X-Received: by 10.236.151.41 with SMTP id a29mr12409585yhk.39.1391073219649; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.170.123.16 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> From: Tobias Markmann Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:13:18 +0100 Message-ID: To: Alexander Holler Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303a30f71d249104f12c7936 Cc: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:13:44 -0000 --20cf303a30f71d249104f12c7936 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler wrote: > Why does it use JSON and not XML? This makes it necessary to use another > parser besides the XML-parser already available in http- and xmpp-clients > and servers. > > And if uses JSON, please make sure to define how comments will have to > look. Last time I looked at the JSON spec, it didn't know comments, > something I have no comment for. ;) > It uses JSON because it uses the JSON Web Key[1] format. POSH was generalized to work for more than just the XMPP protocol, which, I suppose, is the reason for it not wanting to depend on XML parsers. The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I guess the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. Cheers, Tobias [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key-20 [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis-10 --20cf303a30f71d249104f12c7936 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= hu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de= > wrote:
Why does it use= JSON and not XML? This makes it necessary to use another parser besides th= e XML-parser already available in http- and xmpp-clients and servers.

And if uses JSON, please make sure to define how comments will have to look= . Last time I looked at the JSON spec, it didn't know comments, somethi= ng I have no comment for. ;)

It uses JSON becau= se it uses the JSON Web Key[1] format. POSH was generalized to work for mor= e than just the XMPP protocol, which, I suppose, is the reason for it not w= anting to depend on XML parsers.

The JSON[2]= spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I guess the JS= ON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments.

Cheers,
Tobias

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key-20
[2]=C2=A0http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-json-rf= c4627bis-10
=C2=A0
--20cf303a30f71d249104f12c7936-- From holler@ahsoftware.de Thu Jan 30 02:55:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943481A042C for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:55:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.208 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GCThN9UYoP_t for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:55:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ahsoftware.de (h1446028.stratoserver.net [85.214.92.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1081A01BC for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:55:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 2A6CC423C293; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:55:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiche.ahsoftware (p57B2361D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.54.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E825423C26F for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:55:01 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix, from userid 65534) id D085A8CFD8; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:54:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:feeb::c685:8ff:fe12:175d] (unknown [IPv6:feeb::c685:8ff:fe12:175d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD218C441; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:54:24 +0100 From: Alexander Holler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tobias Markmann References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:55:08 -0000 Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler wrote: > The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I guess > the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined. Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # or //) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't standardized. And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one (human) would like to have comments. Regards, Alexander Holler From jhildebr@cisco.com Thu Jan 30 04:25:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8B81A038E for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:25:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2JwngPbrO6bt for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:25:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51D11A0207 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:25:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1052; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391084747; x=1392294347; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=KtO469fgvEt2JTzToJ2+9IB4y4M7xxDfSoA18/7xBO8=; b=F7kipWXDjZeedcvWGqal7qlfKHvG9dmexQiWAoARIThtBNpFRcVt26W7 C0Gs7mzu10D0kYR7J4C2B50yd1zDB7yO4Z1hbaEQlMNxNQQeDv4zkoZ7c TcUNwfSI6pX65XEu6u8LiXST2dNHXf7n64WjLJhtAc2pKqVjOtkT3Tz1C U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgoFAH9D6lKtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABZgww4V70fgQgWdIImAQEEAQEBNzQLEAIBCDYQJwslAgQBDQWIBQ3LXhMEjwIHhDgEmCiSH4Mtgio X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,749,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="16677683" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2014 12:25:45 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com [173.36.12.80]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0UCPj7k019589 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:25:45 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.227]) by xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com ([173.36.12.80]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:45 -0600 From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" To: Alexander Holler , Tobias Markmann Thread-Topic: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH Thread-Index: AQHPCyu6QFvRsDOa10+27Lcff5D0k5qdfdSAgAAHcACAABw/AIAAKkWA Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:25:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> In-Reply-To: <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [10.149.12.25] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <398E6480555B904E8F15F09B499AB462@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:25:52 -0000 (As chair) JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please take your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an approach that can be adopted. On 1/30/14 11:54 AM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: >Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann: >> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler >>wrote: > >> The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I >>guess >> the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. > >Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined. >Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # or >//) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't standardized. > >And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one (human) >would like to have comments. > >Regards, > >Alexander Holler >_______________________________________________ >xmpp mailing list >xmpp@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > From holler@ahsoftware.de Thu Jan 30 04:49:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A751A03DB for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:49:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.208 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B-F6T6HFf8fe for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ahsoftware.de (h1446028.stratoserver.net [85.214.92.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 817041A039B for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 04:49:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 9AEB5423C2A1; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:49:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiche.ahsoftware (p57B2361D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.54.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9166A423C293 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:49:28 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix, from userid 65534) id CC7A87F840; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:49:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from krabat.ahsoftware (unknown [IPv6:feee::5246:5dff:fe8b:95f8]) by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2FE8C8D6; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:48:25 +0100 From: Alexander Holler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" , Tobias Markmann References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:49:35 -0000 Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): > (As chair) > > JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please take > your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an > approach that can be adopted. Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)? I would't call this out of scope. If you adopt POSH without providing (defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this will be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion). I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious problem of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON. Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH and don't want to discuss JSON. Regards, Alexander Holler > > > On 1/30/14 11:54 AM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: > >> Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann: >>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler >>> wrote: >> >>> The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I >>> guess >>> the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. >> >> Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined. >> Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # or >> //) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't standardized. >> >> And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one (human) >> would like to have comments. >> >> Regards, >> >> Alexander Holler >> _______________________________________________ >> xmpp mailing list >> xmpp@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp >> > > From jhildebr@cisco.com Thu Jan 30 05:30:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4AD1A01FC for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 05:30:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h5ESGLBr8Bqk for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 05:30:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9C21A01FB for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 05:30:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2134; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391088637; x=1392298237; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=rH9PMOR8Lg+HY7RcxUiv0rE1oQrS/cQ00Xmm2QopIBw=; b=cHTIgRC46KEsHOUHuhCZj0w8vZ+QCbWYpAqbiLtjreFM/xoBldH8Y5uG +b8qO+uMCARLNHPDGsX641aesZVuL2j2pIET/VYwMVsJUEfEeW8q9prmM 4z35fA+UGN91lIPspXqEdp5VtST0WroTDqCBXjNyWpERltY/RjmGsQHBd A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgwFAC9T6lKtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABZgwyBD70lgQgWdIImAQEEOj8QAgEINhAyJQIEAQ0FiAXLfRePAgeEOASYKJIfgy2CKg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,750,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="300741966" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2014 13:30:37 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com [173.37.183.82]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0UDUafg013293 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:30:36 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.227]) by xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([173.37.183.82]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:30:36 -0600 From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" To: Alexander Holler , Tobias Markmann Thread-Topic: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH Thread-Index: AQHPCyu6QFvRsDOa10+27Lcff5D0k5qdfdSAgAAHcACAABw/AIAAKkWA///1l4CAAByIAA== Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:30:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> In-Reply-To: <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [10.149.12.25] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Ben Campbell , XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:30:41 -0000 On 1/30/14 1:48 PM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: >Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): >> (As chair) >> >> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please >>take >> your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an >> approach that can be adopted. > >Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the >possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable >descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)? I carefully didn't say that. Choosing something other than JSON is certainly in scope. >I would't call this out of scope. If there are others that feel this way, let's have the discussion here to try to change my mind, I suppose. Failing that, there's an appeal process. I will say that when there's a currently chartered and active working group in a particular space (json), it would be really odd to do work on that protocol in a different working group (xmpp). >If you adopt POSH without providing >(defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this will >be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion). That part of the discussion is also in scope. Changing *JSON itself* is the only thing I'm declaring out of scope for this wg. >I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious problem >of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may >start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working >group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON. Setting up a competitor to JSON is not in this group's charter. We don't have to use JSON, but if we do, we'll have a normative reference to the JSON RFC. >Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH and >don't want to discuss JSON. Let's continue that discussion then. Is there anyone else that thinks that comments are important in POSH? Are those comments more important than using JSON? Can we come up with a format that includes comments in a JSON-compatible manner? --=20 Joe Hildebrand From dave@cridland.net Thu Jan 30 06:01:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E016A1A036A for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.378 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ij5-grRHtsFh for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com (mail-ob0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3F891A035B for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id wn1so3463746obc.23 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=oYqqiR/nu8lq8Zregw+XtIcLePgO2IdyQwwNE/adb5g=; b=MzctGawBdUJLiSNumH55Vz4tYwblaCxUA551qXo0+ekUTEdwO2HJaJNeTvlCmAs3WE eE8cSkOegSH7ygnF10I/ygskbOr1EggoSFZH9Ka6itpLu+R1Jtl2FEOOIXFRUQ44KINJ slmHzfe1mXi8a5xt1LRd1pqX5rLmGymSBLeHo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=oYqqiR/nu8lq8Zregw+XtIcLePgO2IdyQwwNE/adb5g=; b=LM1VSTin4ZJYXb2Pp086sRZQqXR4fDSzrWOcFDbNOvji+cRUoUsuY0MeWO20lXhZ/c edLqkWgadLGMKfP4hKxmKp9SkNJHtc8u1sXpq2pCGZyON9yYaYbPOGWLwAZ1eDEKeCSK Sz2BEGmklXoJ/qXtnGJW5QppDZY5niRKIujdmkyDowjakELBfR0bGnUFEqdt5CMU8Xmd zttdBKpsKmAZC5BoAqb9dHWAkv/jaMwO121Nt3/TdK85IcVEY/95rz8QcWSJZaKJL032 d616o+n7m5a+1NT1xoCRnHivclv/fsSW42ky1Qoo778d+pvvoWWW6wsxTzKHCXDZnYeG 73uQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl8lR1h7u7yZYtSQS1vSVYKL690Jd0UEuJUHEI2eZdkYXqjZj6MhRLggNkkcIjwsLToT6Yu MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.103.178 with SMTP id fx18mr561283oeb.69.1391090500649; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.55.138 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.55.138 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:01:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:01:40 +0000 Message-ID: From: Dave Cridland To: Ben Campbell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01184096245a6504f1307f75 Cc: XMPP Working Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:01:46 -0000 --089e01184096245a6504f1307f75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 6 Jan 2014 22:07, "Ben Campbell" wrote: > > > (as chair) > > Hi, > > The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling multi-domain hosting and server connection sharing. > > Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no other working group is chartered for that work. Several people have proposed that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group that needs it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed that, we would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP related requirements. > > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is a good start towards the milestone. > > Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20. Late comment, sorry, but I consider this a slam-dunk adoption personally. I think something like this is inevitable, and this is a viable idea from the outset. (Joe spurred me into replying at the XMPP Summit). Dave. --089e01184096245a6504f1307f75 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 6 Jan 2014 22:07, "Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
>
>
> (as chair)
>
> Hi,
>
> The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling multi-do= main hosting and server connection sharing.
>
> Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that = work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no o= ther working group is chartered for that work. Several people have proposed= that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group that ne= eds it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed that, we= would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP related r= equirements.
>
> Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a work= ing group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in min= d that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is absolute= ly correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is a g= ood start towards the milestone.
>
> Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20.

Late comment, sorry, but I consider this a slam-dunk adoptio= n personally. I think something like this is inevitable, and this is a viab= le idea from the outset.

(Joe spurred me into replying at the XMPP Summit).

Dave.

--089e01184096245a6504f1307f75-- From ben@nostrum.com Thu Jan 30 07:12:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5D81A03E1 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:12:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CcdORkGH3EFo for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:12:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4CE91A038E for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:12:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s0UFC6E6076796 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:12:07 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:12:05 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <88C7A135-498A-44B4-9855-413B7CEE091B@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> To: Joe Hildebrand X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:12:27 -0000 (As the "other chair:) I concur with Joe that extensions to JSON itself belong in the JSON = working group. That being said, if we run into a JSON limitation, = nothing prevents us (or some subset of us) from taking the problem to = the JSON wg. Perhaps if any JSON chairs happen to be monitoring this = thread, they can comment on how this sort of thing fits in their charter = and schedule ;-) (As individual: I am agnostic towards the need for comments, and if they = are best handled in JSON (the format, not the wg) vs elsewhere. I await = further discussion to form an opinion.) Thanks! Ben. On Jan 30, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) = wrote: > On 1/30/14 1:48 PM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: >=20 >> Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): >>> (As chair) >>>=20 >>> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please >>> take >>> your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an >>> approach that can be adopted. >>=20 >> Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the >> possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable >> descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)? >=20 > I carefully didn't say that. Choosing something other than JSON is > certainly in scope. >=20 >> I would't call this out of scope. >=20 > If there are others that feel this way, let's have the discussion here = to > try to change my mind, I suppose. Failing that, there's an appeal > process. I will say that when there's a currently chartered and = active > working group in a particular space (json), it would be really odd to = do > work on that protocol in a different working group (xmpp). >=20 >> If you adopt POSH without providing >> (defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this = will >> be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion). >=20 > That part of the discussion is also in scope. Changing *JSON itself* = is > the only thing I'm declaring out of scope for this wg. >=20 >> I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious = problem >> of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may >> start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working >> group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON. >=20 > Setting up a competitor to JSON is not in this group's charter. We = don't > have to use JSON, but if we do, we'll have a normative reference to = the > JSON RFC. >=20 >> Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH = and >> don't want to discuss JSON. >=20 > Let's continue that discussion then. Is there anyone else that thinks > that comments are important in POSH? Are those comments more = important > than using JSON? Can we come up with a format that includes comments = in a > JSON-compatible manner? >=20 > --=20 > Joe Hildebrand >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp From ben@nostrum.com Thu Jan 30 07:16:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 611C31A0398 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:16:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.036 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mHLtcvU-MM_V for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:16:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2241A1A038E for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:16:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s0UFG5p8076996 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:16:07 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:16:04 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> To: Alexander Holler X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:16:18 -0000 (As [the other] Chair) Alexander, do you support (or object to) adoption of POSH as a working = group item?=20 Keep in mind that adoption doesn't imply the draft is complete or even = correct, just that it's the best way forward. I expect we would continue = this discussion, among other technical discussions. Thanks! Ben. On Jan 30, 2014, at 6:48 AM, Alexander Holler = wrote: > Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): >> (As chair) >>=20 >> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please = take >> your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an >> approach that can be adopted. >=20 > Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the = possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable = descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)? >=20 > I would't call this out of scope. If you adopt POSH without providing = (defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this will = be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion). >=20 > I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious problem = of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may = start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working = group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON. >=20 > Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH = and don't want to discuss JSON. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Alexander Holler >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On 1/30/14 11:54 AM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: >>=20 >>> Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann: >>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler >>>> wrote: >>>=20 >>>> The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. = I >>>> guess >>>> the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. >>>=20 >>> Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined. >>> Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # = or >>> //) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't = standardized. >>>=20 >>> And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one = (human) >>> would like to have comments. >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>>=20 >>> Alexander Holler >>> _______________________________________________ >>> xmpp mailing list >>> xmpp@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp From holler@ahsoftware.de Thu Jan 30 09:33:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A16991A03C7 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:33:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.208 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id khr9f_Ksuplz for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:33:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ahsoftware.de (h1446028.stratoserver.net [85.214.92.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5F61A03E0 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:33:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 6B3C8423C2C9; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:33:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiche.ahsoftware (p57B2361D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.54.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37231423C2B9 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:33:24 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 658948C441; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:33:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from krabat.ahsoftware (unknown [IPv6:feee::5246:5dff:fe8b:95f8]) by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D967F873; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52EA8CD5.5040000@ahsoftware.de> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:33:09 +0100 From: Alexander Holler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Campbell References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:33:31 -0000 Am 30.01.2014 16:16, schrieb Ben Campbell: > (As [the other] Chair) > > Alexander, do you support (or object to) adoption of POSH as a working group item? Hmm, I haven't studied POSH in depth, but I like everything which gets rid of the need of DNSSEC (to store certificates) or CA's and enables the use of e.g. self-signed certificates for XMPP. I don't trust the root key of DNSSEC or any CA. ;) So I would like POSH, I just think it should accept some form of comments in their JSON (as most JSON-parsers already do). I've run into that problem with missing standardized comments in JSON already in other places, that's why I've brought up that topic (as I really think it is fatal design flaw of JSON in it's current form, at least if whatever that JSON is used for should be readable/editable by humans). Regards, Alexander Holler > > Keep in mind that adoption doesn't imply the draft is complete or even correct, just that it's the best way forward. I expect we would continue this discussion, among other technical discussions. > > Thanks! > > Ben. > > On Jan 30, 2014, at 6:48 AM, Alexander Holler wrote: > >> Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): >>> (As chair) >>> >>> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. Please take >>> your suggestions to the JSON working group if you think you have an >>> approach that can be adopted. >> >> Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks the possibility to use comments (either to provide human readable descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate something)? >> >> I would't call this out of scope. If you adopt POSH without providing (defining) a way how to add comments to the JSON definitions, this will be a serious flaw (in my humble opinion). >> >> I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious problem of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like "comments may start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's adoption if the working group is going to adopt it. You might call it a "variant" of JSON. >> >> Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for POSH and don't want to discuss JSON. >> >> Regards, >> >> Alexander Holler >> >>> >>> >>> On 1/30/14 11:54 AM, "Alexander Holler" wrote: >>> >>>> Am 30.01.2014 10:13, schrieb Tobias Markmann: >>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Holler >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The JSON[2] spec referenced by JWK doesn't mention comments at all. I >>>>> guess >>>>> the JSON you'll use in JWK simply can't include any comments. >>>> >>>> Thats why I said POSH should define how comments shpuld be defined. >>>> Almost any JSON parser provides a syntax for comments (e.g. using # or >>>> //) and I'm unable to understand why comments in JSON aren't standardized. >>>> >>>> And if I read the draft for POSH, e.g. setion 8. shows why one (human) >>>> would like to have comments. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Alexander Holler >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> xmpp mailing list >>>> xmpp@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp >>>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> xmpp mailing list >> xmpp@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > From lancestout@gmail.com Fri Jan 31 05:55:01 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E301A1F1A for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:55:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sHeaUDRao5hi for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:55:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ee0-x22f.google.com (mail-ee0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D88561A01ED for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:54:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f47.google.com with SMTP id d49so2293540eek.34 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:54:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:references :to:in-reply-to; bh=YSoZIcfwBv/z+6+5uA1KYBk8H/elFMirD8C7T+UWnaU=; b=tcL4PRJfTK/ZzECJH3KNlj9WdlelFEDCq9O6xe5TKmMhKs3343D8rtQSWEGTE5XuTD ztbD35vtZ7aqfFJTfYMJrekI1ZBdf8RJuDpaz2G7yAtUeVS/L1f7F4MuzzCmU0XUoQJd PUTHb83ACQYS2ONm+SRskPF1FrdO1o8fllk7lt17Evx4x/UdF2xh6Gz2Ovyf4R9oFtvG 1oLTbbBerASrBEAvjwmjAAz+qyfPUBWJiqrj2PWDbDzlrgCDlOJzv4THz4OTsDvdZGMH DyN6N0ZwCVWFzL3adOlmmTrBFpkEs4MRiljxToSBNTxp86NArNEiUHuj/ioatjkhB3mw meXw== X-Received: by 10.14.209.129 with SMTP id s1mr25077059eeo.21.1391176495869; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:54:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.103.150.44] (173-38-208-169.cisco.com. [173.38.208.169]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o43sm36760415eef.12.2014.01.31.05.54.53 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Jan 2014 05:54:54 -0800 (PST) From: Lance Stout Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_518523FE-FA12-45E4-B92C-B938FF985FA8"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Message-Id: <4F7B0BA5-02F6-4BFD-91B3-A248120DA9BF@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 14:54:51 +0100 References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> To: XMPP Working Group In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:55:01 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_518523FE-FA12-45E4-B92C-B938FF985FA8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +1 to adopting POSH in the XMPP WG; this is a good starting point to = work from. --Apple-Mail=_518523FE-FA12-45E4-B92C-B938FF985FA8 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIM5jCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMsohUWcASz7GfKrpTOMKqANy9BV7V0igWdGxA8IU77L3aTxErQ+ fcxtDYZ36Z6GH0YFn7fq5RADteP0AYzrCA+EQTfi8q1+kA3m0nwtwXG94M5sIqsvs7lRP1aycBke /s5g9hJHryZ2acScnzczjBCAo7X1v5G3yw8MDP2m2RCye0KfgZ4nODerZJVzhAlOD9YejvAXZqHk sw56HzElVIoYSZ3q4+RJuPXXfIoyby+Y2m1E+YzX5iCZXBx05gk6MKAW1vaw4/v2OOLy6FZH3XHH tOkzUreG//CsFnB9+uaYSlR65cdGzTsmoIK8WH1ygoXhRBm98SD7Hf/r3FELNvUCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSuVYNv7DHKufcd +q9rMfPIHeOsuzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBADqpJw3I07QW ke9plNBpxUxcffc7nUrIQpJHDci91DFG7fVhHRkMZ1J+BKg5UNUxIFJ2Z9B90Micc/NXcs7kPBRd n6XGO/vPc87Y6R+cWS9Nc9+fp3Enmsm94OxOwI9wn8qnr/6o3mD4noP9JphwUPTXwHovjavRnhUQ HLfo/i2NG0XXgTHXS2Xm0kVUozXqpYpAdumMiB/vezj1QHQJDmUdPYMcp+reg9901zkyT3fDW/iv JVv6pWtkh6Pw2ytZT7mvg7YhX3V50Nv860cV11mocUVcqBLv0gcT+HBDYtbuvexNftwNQKD5193A 7zN4vG7CTYkXxytSjKuXrpEatEiFPxWgb84nVj25SU5q/r1Xhwby6mLhkbaXslkVtwEWT3Van49r KjlK4XrUKYYWtnfzq6aSak5u0Vpxd1rY79tWhD3EdCvOhNz/QplNa+VkIsrcp7+8ZhP1l1b2U6Ma xIVteuVMD3X0vziIwr7jxYae9FZjbxlpUemqXjcC0QaFfN7qI0JsQMALL7iGRBg7K0CoOBzECdD3 fuZil5kU/LP9cr1BK31U0Uy651bFnAMMMkqhAChIbn0ei72VnbpSsrrSdF0BAGYQ8vyHae5aCg+H 75dVCV33K6FuxZrf09yTz+Vx/PkdRUYkXmZz/OTfyJXsUOUXrym6KvI2rYpccSk5MIIGqjCCBZKg AwIBAgICL6UwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENv bSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYD VQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0x MzAzMTQwNTM1MTJaFw0xNTAzMTUyMjMyMzZaMIGMMRkwFwYDVQQNExBQTDAxbVhKMjhha3BBRzVj MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzETMBEGA1UECBMKV2FzaGluZ3RvbjESMBAGA1UEBxMJS2VubmV3aWNrMRQw EgYDVQQDEwtMYW5jZSBTdG91dDEjMCEGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYUbGFuY2VzdG91dEBnbWFpbC5jb20w ggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCr0XNL4SLaoBR9y72zNo3eAefV7vk1UaEx xML9TqPKZHV9gGxA/XO5YilACUU/l5In+8akri5djy/haORYEm5HwsR/R1vxhOK7cBEyXMCY41Vg KyqnQPJlidJ0L5PMinz1cwo0wyLlh8WhxIBHBjgLbA8XAoDC7FL6KzDq+qoJdsBbehu4W9fVscRr T7XeM41zHjc7FqJOD8I2n9Z5CIlEeWwaIEZO0HpxOlcbD5EGVaC7Wbji/nEOuQ1OI6iGId/7Xakg JrGfjSg1wQ5dXIBMzbSZmw3B6WmDdNgpCzHYL+QrCLrFenO0u2D6ZR/dZQgIkPRhL6I7PqniJ3FN 0hJpAgMBAAGjggMSMIIDDjAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIEsDAdBgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEF BQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFFggdjTZDgsglI1DBpZiCB24Ub+ZMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaA FK5Vg2/sMcq59x36r2sx88gd46y7MFcGA1UdEQRQME6BFGxhbmNlc3RvdXRAZ21haWwuY29tgRRs YW5jZXN0b3V0QGdtYWlsLmNvbYEObGFuY2VAbGFuY2UuaW2BEGxhbmNlQGFuZHlldC5uZXQwggFM BgNVHSAEggFDMIIBPzCCATsGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIDMIIBKjAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjCB9wYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2Vy dGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRoaXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBh Y2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDIgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0 YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFuY2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2Ug aW4gY29tcGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wNgYDVR0fBC8w LTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTItY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUH AQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEFBQcwAYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczIv Y2xpZW50L2NhMEIGCCsGAQUFBzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIu Y2xhc3MyLmNsaWVudC5jYS5jcnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20v MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQALnAVqIrddlyGYqOAb4TfJ25u3sOtC352yAF7VaQdhkV/Z7Rum OPpsEN7rwLfHOphYhafI4IxKy39NZbFBjzzcW8Kx6OJ1L/eDEW5Dbt1XzaBF4VVM1/DZyg/l3C0N 9/YrumhcgdSUgxLL2d/GzEk1dNTcZLpLJABf6L1W5RszU4HSPyVppLzYVVq5yLwmKnlIcnDjEdMr jmsFq8b0Duk1j05IE2KBiWNy/Q0H9Hj/943/rvQOx7464jzuEGkWYO8AU7Nmq3h2DLoo8GECFwxy e7rSL0o3KFkAQHC0YE/8GbaT05Jo7xnF/9X/IOWd0rSvBmTVkreGARQywViv35eCMYIDbDCCA2gC AQEwgZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJT ZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFz cyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICL6UwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAa0wGAYJ KoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTQwMTMxMTM1NDUxWjAjBgkq hkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUnJJswQXtXXHsdHoVyHb7CboD41gwgaQGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDGBljCBkzCBjDEL MAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdp dGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDIgUHJpbWFy eSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgIvpTCBpgYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZaggZMwgYwxCzAJ BgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRh bCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkg SW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICL6UwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAhx++ZiDZU/KP+7Aa d3bQ+zqMwjQ4/d+GJUkd/M4zW8iyNUxK9QFzIseKG8IcCkNmDkBX9gMPg60eaZrMprgFd228KWM5 pRWwZwku7qbE6sfngZBUey3GGM0naqP63oPHx2kRki1NBxiLdo4jxSjo+aJ9qYZPbxcsMUasHcjd IhWt2v8j/EkyDzBcFqVKN3DEgFXjg2BEWEbgHuLekWTF+KL6kn7qXWMBRPgaFJKCOMAM4Vs4SejM Wrr1FB3bIcHl/HjvQbgjANoqBUyFLPPl6/3Yl1Ax9CUYfFSqV0zqFZ9SaKsmaO9/2AWYoh0BRE/F RfJaiS7cuWjSF8s0TYSLDwAAAAAAAA== --Apple-Mail=_518523FE-FA12-45E4-B92C-B938FF985FA8-- From mamille2@cisco.com Fri Jan 31 07:13:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EA4A1A020C for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:13:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -13.987 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LXtLnrnMSJuK for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67F61A0193 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:13:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4812; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391181227; x=1392390827; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QRD5XQIgGC0v1YB+YZR/w6zgbyQK6r3KxfRls6/GdPg=; b=lYUdAtfyxV3vuc3sYDebIs+l1v5RaMXq2SjjkevQiCD9uTyEXeGL550E DaRpZMDo9IKBY1d1w1KpXqaoK5cNSN7aUGN6JRFIHBwyL85CqNFT8XqN2 SQxuy8cafcVDc1aZtfv0NEwfeHqvM+d61SVJaynkDTdqJE4Mj/fFqjarI c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgUFAJa861KtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABZgww4V70uCoEIFnSCJQEBAQQBAQFrChELGAkWDwkDAgECARUWGgYBDAYCAQGIAQ3MWReOTzqEOASJETiOYZIhg02CCg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,758,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="301028513" Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2014 15:13:47 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0VFDk25014633 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:13:46 GMT Received: from excelsior.local (10.129.24.73) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (173.37.183.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:13:46 -0600 Message-ID: <52EA6FB3.2050007@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 08:28:51 -0700 From: Matt Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Campbell , Joe Hildebrand , XMPP Group References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> <88C7A135-498A-44B4-9855-413B7CEE091B@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <88C7A135-498A-44B4-9855-413B7CEE091B@nostrum.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.129.24.73] Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:13:59 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 [ speaking as a co-chair of the JSON Working Group ] The sole item for the JSON WG -- an update to RFC4627 -- is currently in the RFC editor's queue. The WG discussed the topic of comments a number of times, but there was no consensus to add comments to the JSON format at the time. The JSON WG is currently discussing what to do next. [ speaking personally ] I don't think the lack of a specific syntax for comments is all that harmful. Plenty of systems use JSON today for configuration, and seem to be getting by fine; *some* of them use a special syntax, but many (from the discussions in the jSON WG, it might even be a majority) make use of special name/value pairs within the objects. - -- - - m&m Matt Miller < mamille2@cisco.com > Cisco Systems, Inc. On 1/30/14, 8:12 AM, Ben Campbell wrote: > (As the "other chair:) > > I concur with Joe that extensions to JSON itself belong in the JSON > working group. That being said, if we run into a JSON limitation, > nothing prevents us (or some subset of us) from taking the problem > to the JSON wg. Perhaps if any JSON chairs happen to be monitoring > this thread, they can comment on how this sort of thing fits in > their charter and schedule ;-) > > (As individual: I am agnostic towards the need for comments, and if > they are best handled in JSON (the format, not the wg) vs > elsewhere. I await further discussion to form an opinion.) > > Thanks! > > Ben. > > On Jan 30, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) > wrote: > >> On 1/30/14 1:48 PM, "Alexander Holler" >> wrote: >> >>> Am 30.01.2014 13:25, schrieb Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr): >>>> (As chair) >>>> >>>> JSON comments are *out of scope* for the XMPP working group. >>>> Please take your suggestions to the JSON working group if you >>>> think you have an approach that can be adopted. >>> >>> Hmm, so you are going to define or adopt a standard which lacks >>> the possibility to use comments (either to provide human >>> readable descriptions or as a way to quickly deactivate >>> something)? >> >> I carefully didn't say that. Choosing something other than JSON >> is certainly in scope. >> >>> I would't call this out of scope. >> >> If there are others that feel this way, let's have the discussion >> here to try to change my mind, I suppose. Failing that, there's >> an appeal process. I will say that when there's a currently >> chartered and active working group in a particular space (json), >> it would be really odd to do work on that protocol in a different >> working group (xmpp). >> >>> If you adopt POSH without providing (defining) a way how to add >>> comments to the JSON definitions, this will be a serious flaw >>> (in my humble opinion). >> >> That part of the discussion is also in scope. Changing *JSON >> itself* is the only thing I'm declaring out of scope for this >> wg. >> >>> I'm not calling that the XMPP working group fixes that serious >>> problem of JSON, I'm calling that they will add a sentence like >>> "comments may start with a #) to the POSH standard or it's >>> adoption if the working group is going to adopt it. You might >>> call it a "variant" of JSON. >> >> Setting up a competitor to JSON is not in this group's charter. >> We don't have to use JSON, but if we do, we'll have a normative >> reference to the JSON RFC. >> >>> Anyway, I've just wanted to provide a maybe useful comment for >>> POSH and don't want to discuss JSON. >> >> Let's continue that discussion then. Is there anyone else that >> thinks that comments are important in POSH? Are those comments >> more important than using JSON? Can we come up with a format >> that includes comments in a JSON-compatible manner? >> >> -- Joe Hildebrand >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ xmpp mailing >> list xmpp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > > _______________________________________________ xmpp mailing list > xmpp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJS6m+zAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO1r4IIAI+/MgKzDl1Jdps6oqCdF3AO Bn0gwobcV8zXU8jMrgEdW3HbuydzHYLdo19hIN8AK7gJeZSZQrMuczKlxCnsfIDW x85b1heSaB1z1H3DmJlBE/1LF4BwRroJ8mEnvtVPbqn758r7lKNwjWUaH03qvL7Z USV8nBZuA1FNvx8+VxJh/2xE6eYiShMmyVCyJDbCA7eR72WLZj4vzh4syg8htvEk d/FGlbwQjn51C/87mhU/fEKCWsjelOTP3NlmRr2U/uVLPGgUU6aoBww+UobXU9Vk KR7mFAY7YKwRW3ZA2bFNTiHsAwPEVF5hOIXLxn8X+egP3EdEZuN9d68H6UwvO1s= =/m++ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From holler@ahsoftware.de Fri Jan 31 07:49:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA2D1A0367 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:49:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.208 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jOwBOjXYX-er for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ahsoftware.de (h1446028.stratoserver.net [85.214.92.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6CC11A028B for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:49:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 7DFA2423C2AB; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:49:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiche.ahsoftware (p57B23771.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.178.55.113]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ahsoftware.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67534423C2A1 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:49:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix, from userid 65534) id CDD468C333; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:49:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:feeb::c685:8ff:fe12:175d] (unknown [IPv6:feeb::c685:8ff:fe12:175d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eiche.ahsoftware (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8A0D7F85A for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:49:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52EBC605.5000604@ahsoftware.de> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:49:25 +0100 From: Alexander Holler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: xmpp@ietf.org References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> <52EA1171.9010604@ahsoftware.de> <52EA2F60.4070103@ahsoftware.de> <52EA4A19.5060103@ahsoftware.de> <88C7A135-498A-44B4-9855-413B7CEE091B@nostrum.com> <52EA6FB3.2050007@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <52EA6FB3.2050007@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:49:44 -0000 Am 30.01.2014 16:28, schrieb Matt Miller: > [ speaking as a co-chair of the JSON Working Group ] > > The sole item for the JSON WG -- an update to RFC4627 -- is currently > in the RFC editor's queue. The WG discussed the topic of comments a > number of times, but there was no consensus to add comments to the > JSON format at the time. > > The JSON WG is currently discussing what to do next. > > [ speaking personally ] > > I don't think the lack of a specific syntax for comments is all that > harmful. Plenty of systems use JSON today for configuration, and seem > to be getting by fine; *some* of them use a special syntax, but many > (from the discussions in the jSON WG, it might even be a majority) > make use of special name/value pairs within the objects. When you use it for configuration, you can just use the comment type the parser of your choice uses. You rely on that parser anyway and will unlikely switch it. And that workaround to use a special key with the comment as value is ugly and doesn't give you the possibility to quickly or temporary disable stuff, nor does it give you the possibility to comment whole blocks. Nothing of the above is a solution for standards. They can not rely on the parser and using a special key as comment doesn't make sense. And I'm unable to see why they have a problem in defining a character and it's successors until newline as whitespace. Maybe they can't decide on the character. They even don't have to enforce it, all what is necessary is that they standardize one and the same character for the optional comment-functionality so that all comment-allowing parsers do use the same character. Something which should have been done right from the beginning. Anyway, I assume I'm now really offtopic. Sorry for that, but for me missing comment functionality is a show blocker for many things and it smells like going back to stone age. Regards, Alexander Holler From k.i.smith@gmail.com Fri Jan 31 23:55:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3CCA1A024A for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.278 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qZcwesxTnU-e for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vb0-x236.google.com (mail-vb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C841A008B for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id w20so3585178vbb.13 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lb/+lRSRMWq682PBzpCBiKX20USab2fIGZAQyBTWW/k=; b=IgKFo1C6sCD33e/uwjybHLSVmaf7s3XrFrfWHQLPVXYFLAiEVjpSO/vRwZiBsjkqxu v855a3U/ZmV6JtiOILAwQnKbtb9KEBLnuhyqeuvLeZH3AjOeApJrB+5qR4B4hLFBUqf2 cw0r/DtM3MiEonthFRmFMcbwMhPmB1XFdeOPnzxYY4k8jjHlCPGRE4etdPnFwdY5k/B/ DFzcX3Ytkg3IMwGWAjEb8NoOXYuhDhYX7CKw1fDP6pK36K7qujzzkleIjDxY0omoJ9y7 Y/GoV2+mGdLKDmbyateoYq518rLAHhtzop33tUTDZd1DCE074wYd6fPfa8R9+CXsoDt+ k7Ew== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.38.33 with SMTP id d1mr16558759vdk.4.1391241310149; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:10 -0800 (PST) Sender: k.i.smith@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.245.134 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:55:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> References: <3E197582-9715-4FE9-AA4A-322FDC18F301@nostrum.com> Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 07:55:10 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: zoEtslxfUaMmnBX4hn2NvQpz8zQ Message-ID: From: Kevin Smith To: Ben Campbell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: XMPP Group Subject: Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: kevin@kismith.co.uk List-Id: XMPP Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 07:55:15 -0000 On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a = working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in= mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is abso= lutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the draft is= a good start towards the milestone. I don't much like POSH as a concept; it resolves the issue of virtual hosting certificates (keys) by making it someone else's responsibility to virtual host certificates(keys). However, this is a mostly solved problem for HTTPS and I think the WG should adopt POSH in the absence of better options. /K