[jadmin] trusted federation

[Johansson Olle E]

18 jan 2008 kl. 02.41 skrev Peter Saint-Andre:

> Neil Stevens wrote:
>> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> I have posted some thoughts on upgrading the Jabber network to  
>>> encrypted-only s2s here:
>>>
>>> https://stpeter.im/?p=2136
>>>
>>> Flames are welcome. :)
>> The key effect of this would be to fragment the network. It'll be  
>> just like email, with some people choosing to plug their ears and  
>> ignore a lot of people.  It seems to me that would be to make xmpp  
>> a whole lot less useful as a public communications network.
>> Now if you *want* XMPP to devolve into a set of mutually- 
>> incommunicative cliques, that's fine, but I don't see the point in  
>> that.  It'll just drive people toward AIM or something.
>
> We heard the same arguments in October 2000 when we started  
> enforcing dialback.
>
One side of me likes enforcing, but on the other hand the practical  
side of me agrees with Neil, it will lead to fragmentation. Whether  
that is something you wish for depends on the software changes done in  
the short perspective. If we're very pro-active in the software side  
(it's the software that users and admins see) the result will be that  
the 2009 switch leaves only the spammers in the cold. I think everyone  
agrees that we actually need that kind of fragmentation.

If this could be displayed in the client somehow, it would speed up  
the process. Let's say the client have a visual warning, not too  
annoying, but still something that worries people - like a red lamp  
and a text saying something along the line of "This session is over an  
insecure line with an untrusted remote server".

Oh, darn, I just realized while writing this down that it may lead to  
people moving to more insecure protocols instead, that never ever  
issues a warning.

Regardless, I believe there has too be a lot of evangelisation and SSL  
certificate training in order for this to be a smooth process.

/O