[Council] meeting minutes, 2007-01-03

[Ralph Meijer]

On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 12:15:39PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Results of the XMPP Council meeting held 2007-01-03...
> 
> [..]
>
> 1. XEP-0155: Chat Session Negotiation
> 
> Advance version 0.14 to Draft?
> 
> Ian, Kevin, and Peter voted +1. Chris and Ralph to vote on list.

I don't understand section 9.1. A user may be blocked from presence but
not messages. I find 'invisible' misleading. Also, I can imagine a
server and/or client feature that allows a user to only allow certain
JIDs for chat, and deny all others, whether they are one the roster or
not.

Rest +1.

> 2. XEP-0157: Contact Addresses for XMPP Services
> 
> Ralph to vote on list.

Does this apply to all messages? I imagine servers (= components, too)
being subscribed to publish-subscribe nodes getting notifications to the
domain as <message/>s, for example.

> 3. XEP-0170: Recommended Order of Stream Feature Negotiation
> 
> Ralph to vote on list.

+1. Does this need any updates with regard to XEP-0192?

> [..]
>
> 5. XEP-0190: Best Practice for Closing Idle Streams
> 
> Ralph to vote on list.

Although I find some of the wording a bit odd, I +1 the concept and its
embedding in RFC3920bis.

> 6. XEP-0192: Proposed Stream Feature Improvements
> 
> Ralph to vote on list.

In 3, first sentence it says suupport.

I think the goal is that an initiating entity must be able to decide
when to start sending stanzas. As I see it, this is when none of the
advertised features in a stream are required.

While this XEP doesn't show what to do in case of multiple features that
are a valid choice at a certain stage, the examples in RFC3920bis do.
However, I don't think they are correct. Take the example in 9.1,
client-to-server.

There, in step 3, it appears that to be able to start sending stanzas,
we need to do TLS first. That can't be right, though. Choosing SASL is
ok, too. What's more, TLS is not required to do SASL in this example,
otherwise it wouldn't offer SASL in the first place.

So if this example means to convey that you can choose either, both need
to carry <required/> IMO.

> [..]

-- 
Groetjes,

ralphm